Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MITRE ATT&CK MCP Server

MITRE ATT&CK MCP Server

by imouiche
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_all_campaigns

Retrieve all ATT&CK campaigns for a specified domain, with options to exclude revoked or deprecated entries and include descriptions.

Instructions

Get all ATT&CK campaigns in a domain.

Campaigns represent specific intrusion events or long-running operations 
attributed to threat actors (e.g., SolarWinds, Operation Ghost).

Args:
    domain: ATT&CK domain ("enterprise", "mobile", "ics")
    remove_revoked_deprecated: Whether to exclude revoked/deprecated entries
    include_description: Include campaign descriptions in the output

Returns:
    {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "count": <int>,
      "campaigns": [
         {
            "attack_id": "<Cxxxx or None>",
            "name": "<campaign name>",
            "stix_id": "campaign--UUID",
            "description": "<text or null>"
         },
         ...
      ],
      "formatted": "<nicely formatted output>",
      "message": "<summary>"
    }

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_all_campaigns"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNoenterprise
include_descriptionNo
remove_revoked_deprecatedNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's behavior (retrieves campaigns, allows filtering by domain, revocation, and description inclusion) and provides the output schema. It does not mention side effects or safety, but the 'get' nature implies read-only. Overall, it is fairly transparent.

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?

The description is well-structured with an introductory sentence, an args block, and a returns block. Every sentence adds value, and the format is efficient for an AI agent to parse. No verbosity.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description covers return values thoroughly. It explains the concept of campaigns and parameter effects. The tool's role among many sibling list tools is clear, making the description complete for its complexity.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining each parameter (domain, remove_revoked_deprecated, include_description) with meaningful context beyond their names and types. This fully clarifies parameter semantics.

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 clearly states 'Get all ATT&CK campaigns in a domain' and elaborates on what campaigns represent (e.g., 'intrusion events or long-running operations attributed to threat actors'), making the tool's purpose specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like get_groups or get_techniques.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for retrieving all campaigns in a domain, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., get_campaigns_attributed_to_group). The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or comparative guidance.

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