Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Voraxx MCP Server

Voraxx MCP Server

by bharat3645
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

cve_lookup

Retrieve CVE details including summary, CVSS score, affected packages, and references for any CVE ID using the free, keyless OSV.dev database.

Instructions

Look up a CVE by ID (e.g. CVE-2021-44228) against the free, keyless OSV.dev vulnerability database. Returns summary, CVSS, affected packages, and references. Read-only; no API key required.

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": {
      "cve_id": "<cve_id>"
    },
    "name": "cve_lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cve_idYesCVE identifier, e.g. 'CVE-2021-44228'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; it discloses read-only nature, no API key needed, and outlines return content (summary, CVSS, affected packages, references).

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded with key information, though the behavioral notes could be separated for even clearer structure.

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?

For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, return content, and behavioral traits, making it complete for an agent to understand and invoke correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and parameter description is clear; the description reiterates the same example but adds context about the database, providing marginal value beyond 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?

Description clearly states it looks up a CVE by ID against the OSV.dev database, distinguishing it from sibling tools nuclei_scan and shodan_host_lookup which serve different purposes.

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?

Description implies usage context (read-only, no API key required) but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with potential alternatives.

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