Skip to main content
Glama
jmaciasc-google

Google Threat Intelligence MCP Server

get_entities_related_to_a_collection

Retrieve related entities for a collection ID, including associations, attack techniques, domains, files, IPs, URLs, threat actors, and malware families.

Instructions

Retrieve entities related to the the given collection ID.

The following table shows a summary of available relationships for collection objects.

Relationship

Description

Return type

associations

List of associated threats

collection

attack_techniques

List of attack techniques

attack_technique

domains

List of Domains

domain

files

List of Files

file

ip_addresses

List of IP addresses

ip_address

urls

List of URLs

url

threat_actors

List of related threat actors

collection

malware_families

List of related malware families

collection

software_toolkits

List of related tools

collection

campaigns

List of related campaigns

collection

vulnerabilities

List of related vulnerabilities

collection

reports

List of reports

collection

suspected_threat_actors

List of related suspected threat actors

collection

hunting_rulesets

Google Threat Intelligence Yara rules that identify the given collection

hunting_ruleset

Note on descriptors_only: When True, returns basic descriptors. When False, returns detailed attributes. IMPORTANT: descriptors_only must be False for the 'attack_techniques' relationship.

Args: id (required): Collection identifier. relationship_name (required): Relationship name. limit (optional): Limit the number of collections to retrieve. 10 by default. descriptors_only (optional)): Bool. Default True. Must be False when the target object type is 'attack_techniques'. Returns: List of objects related to the collection.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
limitNo
descriptors_onlyNo
relationship_nameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: it explains the effect of the 'descriptors_only' parameter and the special requirement for 'attack_techniques' relationship. However, it omits details on error handling, rate limits, or authentication, which is acceptable for a retrieval tool.

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-organized with a table and clear sections, but it is somewhat lengthy. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the purpose. Slight improvement could be made by trimming redundant phrasing.

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 tool's complexity (multiple relationships, special constraints) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: required and optional parameters, behavior of each, and the constraint for attack_techniques. It is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: 'id' as collection identifier, 'relationship_name' with a table of valid values, 'limit' with default, and 'descriptors_only' with its behavior and constraint for attack_techniques.

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 tool retrieves entities related to a collection given an ID and relationship name. It includes a comprehensive table of available relationships, distinguishing it from sibling tools that are specific to other object types.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear usage context: it explains the required parameters and the available relationships. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over other similar 'get_entities_related_to_*' tools, though the name makes it obvious for collections.

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/jmaciasc-google/gti-mcp-server'

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