Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CVE MCP Server

CVE MCP Server

by mukul975
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

parse_cvss

Parse and explain CVSS vector strings (v2, v3.x, v4.0) to understand vulnerability severity and metrics.

Instructions

Parse and explain a CVSS vector string (v2, v3.x, or v4.0).

Args: vector: CVSS vector string (e.g. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H)

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": {
      "vector": "<vector>"
    },
    "name": "parse_cvss"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vectorYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Given no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly states a read-only parse action with no side effects. While it doesn't detail error handling or validation, the tool's simplicity and the existence of an output schema mitigate the need.

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 only three lines, with the purpose front-loaded. Every word is informative, including the inline parameter explanation and example, with no extraneous content.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no nested objects) and has an output schema. The description fully covers the input semantics and purpose, making it complete for its complexity.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The description adds significant meaning beyond the schema by specifying the parameter 'vector' as a CVSS vector string and providing an example. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this compensation is excellent.

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 it 'Parse and explain a CVSS vector string' with versions v2, v3.x, or v4.0. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like calculate_risk_score or check_exploit_availability.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the specific purpose of parsing CVSS vectors implies its usage context, but lacks exclusions or references to sibling tools.

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