Skip to main content
Glama
msaad00

agent-bom

by msaad00
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python

Fleet Scan

fleet_scan
Read-onlyIdempotent

Batch scan MCP server names from inventory exports against the security metadata registry to get per-server risk assessments, including registry match status, risk category, known CVEs, and verdict.

Instructions

Batch-scan a list of MCP server names against the security metadata registry.

    Designed for fleet inventory data (EDR, SIEM, CSV exports) where
    you have server names but not versions. Returns per-server risk assessment
    with registry match status, risk category, tools, credentials, known CVEs,
    and a verdict (known-high-risk, known-medium, known-low, unknown-unvetted).

    Risk levels are category-derived (filesystem=high, database=medium,
    search=low), not made-up threat scores. Every field is traceable to a source.

    Returns:
        JSON with summary (total, matched, unmatched, risk breakdown)
        and per-server details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serversYesComma-separated or newline-separated list of MCP server names to scan. E.g. '@modelcontextprotocol/server-filesystem, brave-search, glean, 50 sleep'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Tool Definition Quality

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses beyond annotations: it explains that risk levels are category-derived and traceable, and that the return includes a summary with breakdowns. This adds value beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, etc.) by clarifying the behavioral model and data provenance.

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?

The description is concise (three paragraphs) and front-loaded: the first sentence states the action, followed by usage context, then return format without excess. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is clear.

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 the presence of an output schema and simple input, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers purpose, usage, return format, and behavioral traits. Slightly missing explicit handling of edge cases or errors, but overall adequate for an informed agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context (batch-scan against registry) but does not provide additional meaning about the parameter format beyond what the schema already includes (comma/newline-separated list). The description's usage context slightly aids understanding but does not significantly elevate the score.

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's function: batch-scan MCP server names against a security metadata registry. It uses a specific verb (batch-scan) and resource (MCP server names), and distinguishes from siblings like registry_lookup by focusing on fleet inventory data without versions.

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 explicit usage context: designed for fleet inventory data (EDR, SIEM, CSV exports) where you have server names but not versions. This implies when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly say when not to use or name alternatives. The context is clear enough for proper selection.

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/msaad00/agent-bom'

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