Skip to main content
Glama
mwnickerson

BloodHound MCP Server

by mwnickerson

get_foreign_gpo_controllers

Identify security principals from one domain that can modify Group Policy Objects in another domain to detect lateral movement and privilege escalation risks in Active Directory environments.

Instructions

Retrieves foreign GPO controllers from a specific domain in the Bloodhound database.
"Foreign GPO Controllers" are defined as security principals (users, groups, or computers) from one domain that have the ability to modify or control Group Policy Objects (GPOs) in another domain within the same forest
These are potential targets for lateral movement and privilege escalation as well as cross domain compromise.

Args:
    domain_id: The ID of the domain to query
    limit: Maximum number of foreign GPO controllers to return (default: 100)
    skip: Number of foreign GPO controllers to skip for pagination (default: 0)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domain_idYes
limitNo
skipNo
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates this is a read operation ('retrieves') and adds context about the security implications of the data. However, it lacks details on behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or response format, which are important for a tool with no annotations.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a definition and usage context, then parameter details. Every sentence adds value, but the structure could be slightly improved by integrating the 'Args' section more seamlessly or using bullet points for clarity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is moderately complete. It covers the purpose, parameters, and some context, but lacks details on output format, error cases, or integration with sibling tools. For a tool with no structured support, it should do more to compensate, such as explaining the return data structure.

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?

The description includes an 'Args' section that explains each parameter's purpose (e.g., 'domain_id: The ID of the domain to query'), adding meaning beyond the input schema which has 0% description coverage. It clarifies defaults and pagination use for 'limit' and 'skip'. Since schema coverage is low, the description compensates well, though it could provide more on parameter constraints or examples.

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 'retrieves foreign GPO controllers from a specific domain in the Bloodhound database' with a specific verb ('retrieves') and resource ('foreign GPO controllers'), and provides a detailed definition of what foreign GPO controllers are. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_gpo_controllers' by specifying 'foreign' controllers across domains.

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 context by stating these are 'potential targets for lateral movement and privilege escalation as well as cross domain compromise,' suggesting when this tool might be relevant. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_gpo_controllers' or other domain-specific tools, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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/mwnickerson/bloodhound_mcp'

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