Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Galgame MCP

Galgame MCP

by YeXuanHs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

re_launch

Launch a GUI reverse engineering tool to inspect PE files. Supports Ghidra, IDA, x64dbg, Cutter, and Binary Ninja, with optional file opening.

Instructions

Launch a GUI RE tool (ghidra/ida/x64dbg/cutter/binary_ninja), optionally opening a PE.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "tool": "<tool>"
    },
    "name": "re_launch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
argsNo
pathNoPE/EXE to open
toolYesghidra|ida|x64dbg|cutter|binary_ninja

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states 'Launch', without explaining side effects, whether the process blocks, requires a display, or returns any output. This leaves the agent without key operational expectations for a process-launching tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action verb 'Launch' and contains no filler. It efficiently conveys the essential purpose and options.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple and the description captures its core function, but it omits operational details like process behavior and return value. Given no annotations or output schema, the description is not fully complete for an agent to predict what happens after invoking it.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema documents 'path' and 'tool' with descriptions, and the description reinforces that opening a PE is optional. However, the 'args' parameter remains undefined in both schema and description, and the description adds little for tool beyond what the schema's enum-style string already provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'Launch' and identifies the resource (GUI RE tool) with explicit tool names (ghidra/ida/x64dbg/cutter/binary_ninja). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like re_rizin or re_ghidra_headless, which are likely CLI/headless variants.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for interactive GUI analysis by listing GUI tools and the optional PE, but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives such as re_rizin or re_ghidra_headless. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools