Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
magicsword-mcp

magicsword-mcp

Official
by magicsword-io
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

List, attach, or detach intel feeds on a policy

manage_policy_intel_sources
Destructive

Lists, attaches, or detaches global/customer-owned intel feeds on a policy current version. First use list_policies to find policy_id and list_intel_sources to discover source IDs for that platform.

Instructions

Lists, attaches, or detaches global/customer-owned intel feeds on a policy current version. First use list_policies to find policy_id and list_intel_sources to discover source IDs for that platform. Customer feeds only affect endpoints in that org with the feed attached. Attach/detach changes the policy version; show the selected policy and sources to the user before making the requested change. List requires policies:read; attach/detach require policies:write.

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": {
      "action": "<action>",
      "policy_id": "<policy_id>"
    },
    "name": "manage_policy_intel_sources"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYes
policy_idYes
source_idNoSource ID for detach
source_idsNo1–60 enabled source IDs for attach; captures share the key creator's rate budget

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_ids / description
      Previous value: -"One or more source IDs for attach"New value: +"1–60 enabled source IDs for attach; captures share the key creator's rate budget"
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_ids / maxItems
      Previous value: -100New value: +60
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real value beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation: it discloses that attach/detach mutates the policy version, that customer feeds only affect endpoints in the owning org with the feed attached, and that scopes differ (policies:read vs policies:write). Missing only detail on reversibility/response shape, which is minor given annotations cover the safety profile.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with the verb/resource and then prerequisites, with zero filler. The final sentence packs both confirmation guidance and permission requirements, which is slightly crammed but still readable.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema and rich annotations, the description covers behavior, prerequisites, permissions, and mutation blast radius - everything needed to invoke correctly. Only the shape of the list response is unstated, a small gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%, but the description compensates well: it ties policy_id to list_policies, source IDs to list_intel_sources, source_id to detach, and source_ids to attach. It does not restate the 1-60 limit or enumerate the action values, but the action/verb mapping is unambiguous from context.

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 three specific verbs (lists, attaches, detaches) against a precise resource (global/customer-owned intel feeds on a policy current version). It is clearly distinct from siblings like list_intel_sources or manage_customer_intel_feed, which operate on the feed catalog rather than the policy-feed attachment.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the prerequisite tools and order ('first use list_policies to find policy_id and list_intel_sources to discover source IDs'), and adds a confirmation step ('show the selected policy and sources to the user before making the requested change'). An agent knows both how to gather inputs and when to pause for approval.

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