List Active Directory domain trust relationships, including source, trust type, and target, to uncover cross-domain attack paths.
Trust relationships between domains. (requête vérifiée)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| k | No | domain_trusts | |
| cy | No | MATCH (a:Domain)-[r:SameForestTrust|CrossForestTrust|TrustedBy]->(b:Domain) RETURN a.name AS from_domain, type(r) AS trust, b.name AS to_domain ORDER BY from_domain |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description offers no details about side effects, read-only nature, required permissions, or output format. The parenthetical 'requête vérifiée' is opaque and adds no behavioral disclosure.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely brief but underspecified; the added parenthetical 'requête vérifiée' provides no actionable information. It is not a model of conciseness because it sacrifices essential content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description fails to explain what the query returns, how results are structured, or what the parameters do. A prebuilt query tool like this needs more context to be invoked correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema contains parameters k and cy with defaults but no descriptions. The tool description does not explain their purpose or how they affect the query, leaving the agent without guidance.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Trust relationships between domains' identifies the subject matter but lacks an action verb, making it ambiguous what the tool does with trust relationships (list, create, delete). It does not distinguish from sibling tools like run_cypher, which could also be used to retrieve this data.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No usage context is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus generic alternatives like run_cypher, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/The-bub/Agent-BloodHound'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server