Skip to main content
Glama
mwnickerson

BloodHound MCP Server

by mwnickerson

get_linked_gpos

Retrieve linked Group Policy Objects from a specific domain to identify potential attack paths for lateral movement, privilege escalation, or persistence in Active Directory security assessments.

Instructions

Retrieves linked GPOs from a specific domain in the Bloodhound database.
"Linked GPOs" are defined as Group Policy Objects that have been linked to or associated with specific Active Directory containers such as domains, organizational units (OUs), or sites
These are potential targets for moving laterally, elevating privileges, or maintaining persistence in the domain.

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

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domain_idYes
limitNo
skipNo
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves data (implying read-only), but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or the format of returned data. The description adds some context about the security relevance of linked GPOs, but lacks operational details needed for an agent to use it effectively.

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 with three sentences: purpose, definition, and security context, followed by a parameter section. It is front-loaded with the core functionality. The parameter section is necessary due to low schema coverage, but the overall structure is efficient with minimal waste.

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 (a database query tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is partially complete. It covers purpose, parameter semantics, and some usage context, but lacks details on output format, error conditions, and behavioral constraints. For a tool with no structured support, it should do more to compensate, leaving gaps for an agent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It provides clear semantics for all three parameters: domain_id specifies the domain to query, limit defines the maximum number to return with a default, and skip handles pagination with a default. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema, making parameters understandable.

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 verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('linked GPOs from a specific domain in the Bloodhound database'), with a specific definition of 'linked GPOs' that distinguishes this tool from other GPO-related tools like get_gpos or get_gpo_info. It provides exact scope and purpose.

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 mentioning 'potential targets for moving laterally, elevating privileges, or maintaining persistence in the domain,' which suggests when this tool might be relevant in security assessments. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_gpos or get_gpo_ous, 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