Skip to main content
Glama
imouiche

MITRE ATT&CK MCP Server

by imouiche

get_all_subtechniques

Retrieve all subtechniques for an ATT&CK domain (enterprise, mobile, ics) with options to exclude revoked entries and include descriptions. Returns subtechnique IDs, names, tactics, and parent technique mapping.

Instructions

Get all subtechniques in a given ATT&CK domain.

Subtechniques are more specific versions of parent techniques,
e.g., T1566.001 and T1566.002 are subtechniques of T1566.

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

Returns:
    {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "count": <number of subtechniques>,
      "subtechniques": [
        {
          "attack_id": "<TXXXX.YYY>",
          "name": "<subtechnique name>",
          "stix_id": "<attack-pattern--UUID>",
          "description": "<text or null>",
          "tactics": ["<Tactic 1>", "<Tactic 2>", ...],
          "parent_attack_id": "<TXXXX>",
          "parent_name": "<parent technique name>",
          "parent_stix_id": "<attack-pattern--UUID>"
        },
        ...
      ],
      "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 are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the return structure in detail, implying a read-only, idempotent operation. It does not mention side effects, failures, or authorization, but given the tool's nature (simple retrieval), this is adequate. No contradictions.

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: a concise opening sentence, a clarifying example, then an Args list, and a full Returns schema. Every sentence is informative and earns its place. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 output schema provided in the description, and the simple nature of the tool (3 optional parameters, no nested objects), the description is complete. It covers all aspects: purpose, parameters, output format, and example. No missing information.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by listing all three parameters with clear explanations: domain is specified with allowed values ('enterprise', 'mobile', 'ics'), and the two boolean parameters are described. This adds significant value beyond the schema's defaults and titles.

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 the action ('Get all subtechniques') and the resource ('in a given ATT&CK domain'). It explains what subtechniques are and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_subtechniques_of_technique' and 'get_all_techniques' by specifying the scope (domain-level).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, it lacks guidance on when not to use it (e.g., when needing subtechniques of a specific parent technique, use 'get_subtechniques_of_technique'). Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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