Skip to main content
Glama

bloodhound_ingest

Extract Active Directory data using NetExec for Bloodhound analysis to identify attack paths and security vulnerabilities during penetration testing.

Instructions

use the netexec's bloodhound feature to extract the json data to be uploaded to bloodhound database

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ipsYes
usernameYes
passwordYes
ntlmNo
kerberosNo

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'bloodhound_ingest' tool. It is registered via the @mcp.tool decorator and executes netexec ldap command with bloodhound collection options using NTLM or Kerberos authentication as specified.
    @mcp.tool(name="bloodhound_ingest",description="use the netexec's bloodhound feature to extract the json data to be uploaded to bloodhound database")
    def bloodhound_ingest(ips:List[str],username:str,password:str,ntlm:bool=False,kerberos:bool=False):
        if (ntlm):
            return run_command(["netexec","ldap"]+ips+["-u",username,"-H",password,"--bloodhound","--collection","all"])
        elif(kerberos):
            return run_command(["netexec","ldap"]+ips+["-u",username,"-p",password,'-k',"--bloodhound","--collection","all"])
        else:
            return run_command(["netexec","ldap"]+ips+["-u",username,"-p",password,"--bloodhound","--collection","all"])
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'extract the json data' and 'upload to bloodhound database', implying a data collection and transfer operation, but lacks details on permissions required, potential side effects (e.g., network impact), rate limits, or output format. This is a significant gap for a tool with multiple parameters and no structured safety hints.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('use netexec's bloodhound feature to extract json data') and purpose ('to be uploaded to bloodhound database'). There is no wasted verbiage, making it appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, parameter usage, and expected outcomes, which are crucial for an agent to operate this tool effectively. The conciseness comes at the cost of insufficient context for safe and accurate use.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning parameters like 'ips', 'username', 'password', 'ntlm', and 'kerberos' are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain what these parameters do, their formats, or how they interact (e.g., that 'ntlm' and 'kerberos' are authentication flags). This leaves the agent with minimal guidance for correct invocation.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('extract the json data') and target ('to be uploaded to bloodhound database'), specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'test_bloodhound_connection' or 'upload_zip_to_bloodhound' by focusing on data extraction via netexec, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies usage for extracting data for Bloodhound, but it doesn't specify prerequisites, timing, or exclusions compared to siblings like 'run_blooodhound_query' or 'upload_zip_to_bloodhound', leaving the agent to infer context.

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/YoussefSahnoun/PentestMCP'

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