Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tenable-mcp

tenable-mcp

by nguyenthdat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

tenable_launch_scan

Destructive

Launch a vulnerability scan by its ID. Optionally specify targets to limit the scan scope.

Instructions

Launch a scan.

WARNING: This is a state-changing operation. Set confirm: true to proceed.

Example: Input: {"scan_id": 123, "confirm": true} Output: {"scan_uuid": "...", "status": "launched"}

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": {
      "scan_id": "<scan_id>"
    },
    "name": "tenable_launch_scan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNo
scan_idYes
targetsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Description adds the 'confirm: true' requirement beyond the annotations' destructiveHint. It also provides an example output, clarifying the mutation behavior. Could mention idempotency or prerequisites.

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?

Short, front-loaded with purpose, includes essential warning and example. No redundant information.

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?

Covers purpose and behavioral warning, but lacks parameter descriptions for scan_id and targets, and doesn't fully describe output for a 3-parameter tool without output schema.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema coverage, the description only clarifies 'confirm' via warning and example. scan_id is shown but not explained, and targets is omitted entirely. Insufficient for effective invocation.

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?

Description clearly states 'Launch a scan' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform read, export, download, or list operations.

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?

Includes a warning about state-changing and requiring confirm, implying caution. However, no explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared 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