Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
futurevuls-mcp

futurevuls-mcp

by keides2
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

futurevuls_search_critical_cves

Search for critical CVEs with CVSS v3 score above a threshold within a specified date range. Prioritize remediation of high-severity vulnerabilities.

Instructions

指定期間内のCVSS v3が指定値以上の脆弱性を検索

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": "futurevuls_search_critical_cves"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
start_dateNo開始日 (YYYYMMDD形式、未指定時は先週月曜日)
end_dateNo終了日 (YYYYMMDD形式、未指定時は今週日曜日)
min_cvssNo最小CVSS v3スコア (デフォルト: 9.0)
groupNo対象グループ名 (ERMS, DBIPS, GPF等)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.2.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool searches for vulnerabilities but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, any side effects, rate limits, or authentication needs. The minimal description lacks 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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with key information. No wasted words, though it could benefit from more structure.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, pagination, or any output format. For a search tool with 4 parameters, more context is expected.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter described in the schema. The description only summarizes the tool's purpose without adding extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies as schema does the work.

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 explicitly states the tool searches for vulnerabilities with CVSS v3 above a specified value within a specified date range. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like futurevuls_get_cves by focusing on critical CVEs and date/CVSS filtering.

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 searching critical CVEs within a period but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No 'when not to use' or comparison with siblings.

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