armorcode-mcp

Bulk Set Product Exploitability

armorcode_bulk_set_product_exploitability

Triage multiple security findings by setting product exploitability tags with optional comments. Use dry run mode to preview changes before applying.

Instructions

Triage multiple findings: comment first, then product_exploitability tag per finding. dryRun defaults true.

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": {
      "productName": "<productName>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "armorcode_bulk_set_product_exploitability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`dryRun`	No
`reason`	Yes
`status`	No	OPEN
`severity`	No
`exploitable`	No
`maxFindings`	No
`productName`	Yes
`findingAgeDays`	No
`subproductName`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Describes the procedural order (comment first, then tag) and dryRun behavior, but with no annotations, it omits important behavioral traits like mutation, permissions, or side effects.

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?

Single sentence is concise, but the structure could be improved by separating the action from the default. Still, no wasted words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 9 parameters, no schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how findings are selected (criteria like productName, findingAgeDays) or what the tool returns.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description only explains 'dryRun' and the high-level action. Most parameters (productName, reason, status, severity, etc.) are not described, leaving the agent to infer their roles.

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?

Clearly indicates bulk triage of multiple findings with a comment and exploitability tag. Distinguishes from sibling 'armorcode_set_product_exploitability' by emphasizing 'bulk' and 'multiple.'

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?

Implies batch operation for multiple findings and mentions dryRun default, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like single-finding tools. No exclusion criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server