Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Forensics Utils MCP Server

Forensics Utils MCP Server

by jus1-c
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

vt_get_file_report_tool

Check file safety by retrieving VirusTotal analysis reports using MD5, SHA1, or SHA256 hashes.

Instructions

Get VirusTotal analysis report for a file by its hash.

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": {
      "file_hash": "<file_hash>"
    },
    "name": "vt_get_file_report_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_hashYesMD5, SHA1, or SHA256 hash of the file

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but provides no details about API key requirements, rate limits, error cases (e.g., hash not found), or whether the report includes detection stats. This is a significant gap for an external API tool.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The output schema exists, so return values are documented elsewhere. However, the description lacks any context about prerequisites (e.g., API key), when to use this vs alternative report tools, or potential limitations. For a simple one-parameter tool, it's adequate but not complete.

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 schema fully describes the single parameter file_hash, including its type, requirement, and accepted hash formats (MD5, SHA1, SHA256). The description adds no additional parameter information, so it earns the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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?

States verb 'Get', resource 'VirusTotal analysis report', and identifies the specific entity type 'file by its hash'. This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like vt_scan_file_tool (scanning) and vt_get_url_report_tool (URL reports).

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 when you have a file hash and need the analysis report, but it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. For example, it doesn't say 'use vt_scan_file_tool to submit a file for analysis' or 'use vt_get_url_report_tool for URLs.' The context is clear but only implicit.

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