Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
guardvibe

guardvibe

by goklab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

scan_secrets

Scan files and directories for exposed secrets, API keys, and credentials using pattern and entropy detection, returning line-level findings and remediation steps.

Instructions

Scan files and directories for leaked secrets, API keys, tokens, and credentials. Detects high-entropy strings, known API key patterns (AWS, Stripe, OpenAI, GitHub, Supabase), exposed .env files, and missing .gitignore coverage. Returns findings with exact line numbers and remediation steps.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "scan_secrets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesFile or directory path to scan
formatNoOutput format: markdown (human) or json (machine-readable for agents)markdown
recursiveNoScan subdirectories

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.66.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv3.35.1
  3. Removedv3.30.0
  4. Addedv3.1.3
  5. Removedv3.1.10
  6. Addedv3.0.51
  7. Removedv3.1.2
  8. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses detection scope (entropy heuristics, vendor key patterns, .env exposure, .gitignore gaps) and that findings include line numbers plus remediation steps, but it never states that the operation is read-only/non-mutating, whether it traverses ignored or binary files, or how it behaves on very large trees.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then detection coverage, then return shape. Every sentence contributes and nothing is padded.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing the return payload (findings with exact line numbers and remediation steps). Detection scope is well covered; the remaining gap is the lack of any read-only/side-effect statement and no mention of scan limits or skip rules.

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 description coverage is 100% and all three parameters (path, format, recursive) are documented in the schema, including the enum semantics. The description adds no parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Scan files and directories for leaked secrets') and enumerates the detection classes, so the agent knows exactly what it does. It fails to distinguish itself from close siblings such as scan_secrets_history, scan_staged, or scan_file, leaving ambiguity about which secret-scanning entry point to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives despite several overlapping siblings (scan_secrets_history, scan_staged, scan_changed_files). Usage is only implied by the word 'scan'.

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