Skip to main content
Glama
Sentinel-One

Purple AI MCP Server

Official
by Sentinel-One
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

get_vulnerability

Retrieve detailed vulnerability information including CVE data, risk scores, and remediation guidance using a vulnerability ID. Prioritize vulnerabilities for patching.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific vulnerability by ID.

Retrieves comprehensive vulnerability data including CVE details, affected assets, risk scores, EPSS metrics, exploit maturity, and remediation information.

Args: vulnerability_id: The unique identifier of the vulnerability (string).

Returns: Detailed vulnerability information in JSON format containing: - id: Unique vulnerability identifier - externalId: External system identifier - name: Vulnerability title/name - severity: CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW, UNKNOWN - status: NEW, IN_PROGRESS, ON_HOLD, RESOLVED, RISK_ACKED, SUPPRESSED, TO_BE_PATCHED - detectedAt: ISO timestamp when vulnerability was detected - lastSeenAt: ISO timestamp of most recent occurrence - updatedAt: ISO timestamp of last update - product: Detection source product name - vendor: Detection source vendor name - asset: Associated asset information {id, name, type, category, cloudInfo, etc.} - scope: Organizational scope {account, site, group} - scopeLevel: account/site/group - cve: CVE details including: - id: CVE identifier (CVE-YYYY-NNNN) - description: CVE description - nvdBaseScore: NVD base score - riskScore: SentinelOne risk score - publishedDate: Publication date - epssScore: EPSS probability score - epssPercentile: EPSS percentile - exploitMaturity: Exploit code maturity level - exploitedInTheWild: Boolean indicating active exploitation - kevAvailable: CISA KEV catalog availability - s1BaseValues: CVSS vector components - riskIndicators: Additional risk indicators - timeline: CVE timeline events - software: Affected software {name, version, fixVersion, type, vendor} - findingData: Additional context and properties - paidScope: Whether under paid scope - remediationInsightsAvailable: Remediation insights availability - selfLink: Link to the vulnerability details - analystVerdict: TRUE_POSITIVE or FALSE_POSITIVE - assignee: Assigned user information {id, email, fullName} - exclusionPolicyId: Exclusion policy identifier if applicable

Common Use Cases: - Vulnerability assessment and prioritization - CVE research and analysis - Risk scoring and exposure analysis - Patch management workflows - Compliance reporting

Raises: RuntimeError: If there's an error retrieving the vulnerability. ValueError: If vulnerability_id is invalid or empty.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vulnerability_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Tool Definition Quality

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description fully covers behavioral traits. It details return fields, error types (RuntimeError, ValueError), and mentions retrieving comprehensive data. However, it could mention idempotency or caching, but overall it is thorough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is lengthy and repeats return field details that are already provided by the output schema (context signals indicate output schema exists). It could be more concise by omitting the verbose return schema listing.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (single parameter, straightforward get operation), the description is complete. It covers purpose, parameters, return structure, use cases, and errors. No gaps are apparent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter 'vulnerability_id' is described as 'The unique identifier of the vulnerability (string).' This adds meaning beyond the schema, which has no description. For a single parameter, this is sufficient and clear.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get detailed information about a specific vulnerability by ID.' It uses a specific verb 'get' and identifies the resource 'vulnerability', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_vulnerabilities' and 'get_alert'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description includes 'Common Use Cases' that imply when to use it, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative tools. The context is clear but lacks exclusionary guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Sentinel-One/purple-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server