Skip to main content
Glama
imouiche

MITRE ATT&CK MCP Server

by imouiche

get_all_mitigations

Retrieve all defensive mitigations from MITRE ATT&CK for enterprise, mobile, or ICS domains. Filter out revoked or deprecated entries and include descriptions.

Instructions

Get all mitigations (defensive countermeasures) in a domain.

Mitigations are security controls or practices that can reduce the
effectiveness of adversary techniques (e.g., M1013, M1017).

Args:
    domain: ATT&CK domain ("enterprise", "mobile", "ics").
    remove_revoked_deprecated: Whether to exclude revoked/deprecated mitigations.
    include_description: Whether to include descriptions.

Returns:
    {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "count": <number of mitigations>,
      "mitigations": [
        {
          "attack_id": "MXXXX" | null,
          "name": "<mitigation name>",
          "stix_id": "<course-of-action--UUID>",
          "description": "<text or null>"
        },
        ...
      ],
      "formatted": "<optional human-readable output>",
      "message": "<summary>"
    }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNoenterprise
include_descriptionNo
remove_revoked_deprecatedNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It thoroughly describes the return structure including optional fields and the formatted/message fields. It implicitly indicates read-only by the 'get' verb, but could explicitly state no side effects. The output schema adds transparency.

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 clear sections (intro, Args, Returns) and uses bullet points for the return schema. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Minor redundancy with the definition of mitigations, but overall concise for the information provided.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (listing) and the presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers all parameters and return fields. Does not mention error handling or invalid domain behavior, but that is acceptable for a basic query tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates with an explicit Args section explaining each parameter's purpose and expected values (e.g., domain options, boolean effects). This adds value beyond the bare schema which only provides names and defaults.

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 it retrieves all mitigations in a domain, with a brief definition of mitigations. While it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_mitigations_mitigating_technique by being a broad listing, it does not explicitly contrast with other get_all_* tools.

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 listing all mitigations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus more specific tools (e.g., get_mitigations_mitigating_technique). No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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/imouiche/complete-mitre-attack-mcp-server'

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