Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
re-ios

re-ios

by gyh20062008-commits
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_ipa_entitlements

Extract entitlements from iOS IPA files or .app bundles to analyze app permissions.

Instructions

Extract entitlements from an IPA file or .app bundle.

Args: path: Path to IPA file or .app bundle

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": "get_ipa_entitlements"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, permissions required, input validation, or error behavior. For example, it doesn't indicate if the tool modifies files or requires special access.

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 very brief (two sentences) and front-loads the purpose. It could benefit from a clearer structure (e.g., bullet points), but there is no wasted text.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description is too minimal. It lacks details about the return format, error handling, or any contextual prerequisites (e.g., whether the file must be uncompressed). An agent would be underinformed.

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?

The description adds modest meaning beyond the schema: it specifies the path parameter as 'Path to IPA file or .app bundle'. However, schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not elaborate on format requirements or constraints, leaving ambiguity.

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 verb 'extract' and the resource 'entitlements' from an 'IPA file or .app bundle'. It provides a specific purpose that distinguishes it from sibling tools like `full_analysis`, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios where this tool is preferred (e.g., over `full_analysis`).

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