Skip to main content
Glama

cortex_run_analyzer

Submit observables like IPs, domains, or hashes to a specific analyzer for security investigation. Specify data type, TLP, and PAP levels.

Instructions

Submit an observable to a specific analyzer for analysis

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
papYesPermissible Actions Protocol level (0-3)
tlpYesTraffic Light Protocol level (0=WHITE, 1=GREEN, 2=AMBER, 3=RED)
dataYesThe observable value (IP, domain, hash, URL, etc.)
messageNoOptional context message for the analysis
dataTypeYesThe observable data type
analyzerIdYesThe analyzer ID to run
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the analysis is synchronous, how to obtain results, or any authentication or rate limit implications.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action, though it lacks structure for additional context.

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?

With 6 parameters (5 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain how to interpret the result or any prerequisites for using the tool.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation.

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 specifies the action ('submit'), the resource ('observable to analyzer'), and the purpose ('analysis'). It is clear but does not differentiate from sibling tools like cortex_analyze_observable or cortex_run_analyzer_by_name.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling tools for running analyzers, and the description offers no context on selection criteria.

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/lidless-labs/cortex-mcp'

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