Skip to main content
Glama
cyberbuff

Atomic Red Team MCP

by cyberbuff

query_atomics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search and filter Atomic Red Team tests by free text, technique ID, name, or platform to locate specific attack simulations.

Instructions

Search and filter atomic tests across the repository.

This tool searches through all atomic tests and returns matches based on your criteria. You can search by free-text query, or filter by specific attributes like technique ID, GUID, or platform. Results are paginated — use the returned next_cursor to fetch subsequent pages.

Args: query: Free-text search term to match against all atomic test fields including name, description, commands, and input arguments. Supports multi-word queries where all words must match (AND logic). Examples: "powershell registry", "credential access", "T1059"

guid: Filter by exact atomic test GUID (UUID format).
      Example: "a8c41029-8d2a-4661-ab83-e5104c1cb667"
      Use this when you know the specific test you want to retrieve.

technique_id: Filter by MITRE ATT&CK technique ID. Must follow the format
              T#### or T####.### (e.g., T1059, T1059.001).
              Example: "T1059.001" for PowerShell technique
              Returns all atomic tests associated with this technique.

technique_name: Filter by technique name (case-insensitive partial match).
                Example: "Command and Scripting Interpreter"
                Useful when you know the technique name but not the ID.

supported_platforms: Filter by platform (case-insensitive partial match).
                    Valid platforms: windows, linux, macos, office-365, azure-ad,
                    google-workspace, saas, iaas, containers, iaas:aws, iaas:azure,
                    iaas:gcp, esxi
                    Example: "windows", "linux", "macos"

cursor: Opaque pagination cursor returned by a previous call as `next_cursor`.
        Omit or pass null to start from the first page.

limit: Maximum number of results to return per page (1–200, default 50).

Returns: QueryAtomicsOutput: Structured output containing: - total_results: Total number of matching atomic tests - atomics: List of matching atomic tests for this page - next_cursor: Opaque cursor for the next page, or null if last page - query_metadata: Information about applied filters

Raises: ValueError: If query is empty without any filters ValueError: If query exceeds 1000 characters ValueError: If technique_id format is invalid (must be T#### or T####.###) ValueError: If limit is outside the range 1–200 ValueError: If cursor is malformed

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guidNo
limitNo
queryYes
cursorNo
technique_idNo
technique_nameNo
supported_platformsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
atomicsYesList of matching atomic tests
next_cursorNoOpaque cursor to pass as `cursor` on the next call. Null when this is the last page.
total_resultsYesTotal number of atomic tests matching the query
query_metadataNoMetadata about the query execution (filters applied, etc.)
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description goes far beyond these by detailing pagination via `next_cursor`, multi-word AND logic, exact format requirements for technique_id and GUID, valid platform values, and specific ValueError conditions. This gives the agent a comprehensive model of the tool's runtime behavior beyond the 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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and Raises sections, making it easy to scan. However, there is slight redundancy between the first sentence 'Search and filter atomic tests' and the second sentence 'This tool searches through all atomic tests,' which prevents a perfect score. Still, every other sentence adds necessary detail.

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?

With 7 parameters, no schema descriptions, and an output schema, the description leaves nothing essential uncovered. It specifies parameter constraints, pagination behavior, error conditions, and return structure. It fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage and is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 carries the full burden of documenting parameters. It explains each parameter's purpose, format, examples, and defaults (e.g., limit 1–200, cursor null for first page, valid platform list). This is high-value semantic enrichment that the bare schema entirely lacks.

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 'Search and filter atomic tests across the repository,' which is a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly differentiates from siblings like validate_atomic or generate_atomic by focusing on querying/filtering. Even without explicit sibling comparisons, the purpose is unambiguous.

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 context for when to use this tool: whenever searching or filtering atomic tests with free-text or structured filters. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the detailed parameter documentation (e.g., filtering by GUID, technique ID, platform) implies the tool's role. A 5 would require explicit 'use X instead' guidance, which is absent.

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/cyberbuff/atomic-red-team-mcp'

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