Skip to main content
Glama
awslabs

Threat Modeling MCP Server

Official
by awslabs

add_threat

Add new threats to your threat model, either individually or in batch. Define source, prerequisites, action, impact, and apply STRIDE categories to capture threats effectively.

Instructions

Add a new threat to the model. Supports batch operations via the 'items' parameter.

This tool adds one or more threats to the threat model. IMPORTANT: Each text field must be 200 characters or fewer to comply with the Threat Composer schema. For single item: provide threat_source, prerequisites, threat_action, threat_impact directly. For batch: provide a list of threat dicts in the 'items' parameter.

Args: ctx: MCP context for logging and error handling threat_source: Source of the threat, max 200 chars (required for single item mode) prerequisites: Prerequisites for the threat, max 200 chars (required for single item mode) threat_action: Action performed by the threat, max 200 chars (required for single item mode) threat_impact: Impact of the threat, max 200 chars (required for single item mode) category: STRIDE category of the threat severity: Severity of the threat likelihood: Likelihood of the threat affected_components: List of component IDs affected by the threat affected_assets: List of asset IDs affected by the threat tags: List of tags for the threat items: Optional list of threat dicts for batch operation

Returns: A confirmation message with the threat ID(s)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNo
itemsNo
categoryNo
severityNo
likelihoodNo
prerequisitesNo
threat_actionNo
threat_impactNo
threat_sourceNo
affected_assetsNo
affected_componentsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the 200-character schema limit as IMPORTANT, describes the return value as 'a confirmation message with the threat ID(s)', and notes batch behavior and the ctx parameter's role. This goes beyond the schema, though it doesn't discuss error handling or side effects.

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 well-structured: summary, important note, Args list, and Returns. There is minor redundancy between the first two sentences, but it remains efficient for a tool with 11 parameters. Each section serves a purpose.

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

Completeness4/5

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

It covers all parameters, the 200-character limit, and return behavior, and distinguishes single vs batch operations. Missing details like valid values for category/severity/likelihood or exact dict structure in 'items' are minor gaps, but overall it is sufficient for a threat-adding tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. The Args block lists all 11 parameters, indicates required fields for single-item mode, and explains the batch 'items' parameter. It fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Add a new threat to the model' and clarifies it adds one or more threats, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_threats, update_threat, and delete_threat. The verb and object are explicit, and batch capability is stated, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 provides clear instructions for single-item vs batch modes: 'For single item: provide...' and 'For batch: provide...'. It explains when each mode is appropriate but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, hence a 4 rather than 5.

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/awslabs/threat-modeling-mcp-server'

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