Skip to main content
Glama
Threat Modeling MCP Server

Threat Modeling MCP Server

Threat Modeling MCP Server

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for comprehensive threat modeling with guided code validation.

Table of Contents

Related MCP server: threatmodel-mcp

Overview

This server provides tools for threat modeling, including business context analysis, architecture analysis, threat actor analysis, trust boundary analysis, asset flow analysis, code security validation and comprehensive report generation.

Architecture and Approach

This MCP Server calls the existing agent's LLM instead of making an external API or network call to a different service. It relies on existing client's LLM which could be Amazon-Q, Kiro or Cline.

This Threat Modeling MCP Server has three main functionalities:

  1. Threat modeling phase or state management and prompt controlling.

  2. Prompts steering, which controls the agent to go through a methodic approach to threat modeling using built in definitions of business risks, exposures, threat actors and use STRIDE in sequential order.

  3. Structured input validation and phase-completion checks that support an actionable threat model report.

It also has tools to generate a final report in both Markdown and JSON exportable formats.

Key Advantages of this approach

  • This threat model follows the standard STRIDE approach to threat modeling in phases rather than quick conclusion of assets, boundaries and threats which can lead to hallucination or low quality output.

  • There is an effort by LLM to understand the business context of the project and make valid assumptions which can be controlled by the user.

  • This local server relies on the MCP client's configured LLM (Cline, Amazon Q, Kiro) rather than calling a separate model API. Data exposure depends on the client and any other MCP servers the client invokes.

  • The server keeps the working threat model in memory for the current process. Export tools can write JSON and Markdown snapshots to a .threatmodel directory, but those snapshots are not automatically loaded in a later session.

  • The code-validation tool records evidence supplied by the client after it inspects the implementation, applies status transitions atomically, and fails the phase closed until every current threat and mitigation is covered.

Quick Start Prompts and Examples on how to threat model with this MCP server

Note: Before using these prompts, you must first complete the Installation process to set up the MCP server.

Start a threat model

"Threat model this project using the threat modeling MCP Server"

Being specific in the prompt to use the threat modeling MCP Server will make sure the client (Cline/Kiro/etc) will follow the exact phases and methodology rather than taking short cut path and introduce hallucination in results.

Threat model a subproject or reduce the scope to a sub folder

"Threat model this subfolder using the threat modeling MCP Server"

Running it on a subfolder limits the intended analysis scope. To save exports there, request an output path inside that subfolder; the export location is not inferred automatically from the analysis scope.

Save the result of threat model

"Save the threat model report"

Validate the completeness of the threat modeling process

"Please complete all the phases in the threat model plan and then generate the final report."

Feed an architecture diagram image as input

"Threat model this project using the threat model MCP server and consider this architecture_image.png attached for this review"

Attempt remediating the threats

"Can you see if you can implement mitigation controls in the code based on the threats reported in the threat model"

Regenerate threat model based on code fixes

"Can you updated the threat model based on the code fixes which mitigated the reported threats"

More examples

# Set up context
"Set business context for an e-commerce payment system"

# Add architecture
"Add a web server component using AWS EC2"
"Add a database component using AWS RDS"

# Identify threats
"Add a threat where an attacker with network access performs SQL injection"

# Add mitigations
"Add a mitigation for input validation"

# Export results
"Export the threat model to my_model.tc.json"

Key Features

  • Comprehensive Threat Modeling: Structured approach to identifying, evaluating, and addressing security risks

  • Evidence-Based Code Validation: Records implementation evidence, updates statuses, and produces a deterministic report

  • Business Context Analysis: Understand the business value and criticality of the system

  • Architecture Analysis: Document the system's technical architecture and data flows

  • Threat Actor Analysis: Identify potential adversaries and assess their capabilities

  • Trust Boundary Analysis: Identify trust zones and validate security controls at boundaries

  • Asset Flow Analysis: Track critical assets through the system

  • Threat Identification: Systematically identify potential threats using STRIDE methodology

  • Mitigation Planning: Develop strategies to address identified threats

  • Compact Domain Managers: Action-based tools for assumptions, architecture, actors, boundaries, assets, threats, and mitigations

  • Threat Model Guide: Step-by-step guidance through the threat modeling process

  • Data Model Inspection: One tool for listing enum models and inspecting accepted values

Prerequisites

Before installing the Threat Modeling MCP Server, ensure you have the following requirements:

Installation Requirements

  1. Install uvx from Astral or the GitHub README

    • uvx is part of the uv package manager

    • Verify installation: uvx --version

Installation

Once you have uvx installed and verified to be working, add the below configuation to your mcp.json config file. Depending on the what type of client your are using (kiro/cline/amazon-q) the location of this mcp.json will be different. Once you add the config and restart your IDE, the Threat Modeling MCP Server will be automatically be installed directly from this GitHub repository using uvx.

Note: The tools used by this mcp server for threat modeling are already added to the autoApprove for ease of user experience which enables seamless operation without manual approval prompts for each tool call. All tools are internal to the server and do not make external API calls. If you want to review each of the tools and approve it per invocation, then you need to replace the autoApprove array with this: "autoApprove": []

Configuration

Add the following to your MCP client configuration:

For Amazon Q (~/.aws/amazonq/mcp.json):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "threat-modeling-mcp-server": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "--from",
        "git+https://github.com/awslabs/threat-modeling-mcp-server.git",
        "threat-modeling-mcp-server"
      ],
      "env": {
        "FASTMCP_LOG_LEVEL": "ERROR"
      },
      "disabled": false,
      "autoApprove": ["manage_workflow","export_threat_model","manage_system_context","manage_assumptions","manage_architecture","manage_threat_actors","manage_trust_boundaries","manage_asset_flows","manage_threats","inspect_data_models","manage_code_validation"]
    }
  }
}

For VSCode Cline:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "threat-modeling-mcp-server": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "--from",
        "git+https://github.com/awslabs/threat-modeling-mcp-server.git",
        "threat-modeling-mcp-server"
      ],
      "env": {
        "FASTMCP_LOG_LEVEL": "ERROR"
      },
      "disabled": false,
      "autoApprove": ["manage_workflow","export_threat_model","manage_system_context","manage_assumptions","manage_architecture","manage_threat_actors","manage_trust_boundaries","manage_asset_flows","manage_threats","inspect_data_models","manage_code_validation"],
      "timeout": 60,
      "type": "stdio"
    }
  }
}

For Kiro (~/.kiro/settings/mcp.json):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "threat-modeling-mcp-server": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "--from",
        "git+https://github.com/awslabs/threat-modeling-mcp-server.git",
        "threat-modeling-mcp-server"
      ],
      "env": {
        "FASTMCP_LOG_LEVEL": "ERROR"
      },
      "disabled": false,
      "autoApprove": ["manage_workflow","export_threat_model","manage_system_context","manage_assumptions","manage_architecture","manage_threat_actors","manage_trust_boundaries","manage_asset_flows","manage_threats","inspect_data_models","manage_code_validation"]
    }
  }
}

Running with Kiro CLI

To run the MCP server via kiro-cli with all tools auto-approved:

kiro-cli chat --trust-tools="@threat-modeling-mcp-server/*"

This trusts all tools from the threat-modeling-mcp-server MCP server, so you won't be prompted to approve each tool call individually.

Running with the Custom Kiro CLI Agent

This repository includes a pre-configured Kiro CLI agent that covers nine numbered phases plus the optional Phase 7.5 code-validation step. The agent configuration is in .kiro/agents/threat-modeler.json.

Global install (available from any directory):

./install-kiro-agent.sh

To uninstall: ./install-kiro-agent.sh --remove

Local install (project-specific):

cp -r /path/to/threat-modeling-mcp-server/.kiro /path/to/your-project/.kiro

Usage:

# Non-interactive: run full threat model and exit
kiro-cli chat --agent threat-modeler --no-interactive "Threat model this project"

# Interactive: start a session with the agent
kiro-cli chat --agent threat-modeler

What the agent includes:

  • System prompt (.kiro/prompts/threat-modeler.md): Detailed instructions for the phased STRIDE methodology

  • Skills (.kiro/skills/): Per-phase reference materials, including optional Phase 7.5

  • Auto-approved MCP tools: All threat modeling tools run without manual approval prompts

Output File Management

Before exporting, select the directory being threat modeled with manage_workflow(action="set_project", directory=...). The export tool always creates <selected-project>/.threatmodel/ and writes these artifacts there:

  • <base>.tc.json: strict AWS Threat Composer JSON. This is the only file to import into Threat Composer. It holds only the standard schema keys, uses deterministic UUID ids, and applies Threat Composer's field length limits.

  • <base>.md: the human-readable Markdown report with full text.

  • <base>.extended.json: a separate server-state snapshot (architecture, taxonomy profiles, residual risk, phase progress) with internal ids and full text. It is not importable into Threat Composer. Pass include_extended_data=False to skip it.

The stored model keeps full text. When a field exceeds a Threat Composer limit, only the .tc.json copy is shortened, and the tool response lists each shortened field (by entity, field, and length) under "Export Warnings".

Omitting output_path uses a timestamped base filename. Supplying output_path selects only the base filename; absolute paths, parent traversal, and other directory components cannot redirect any artifact outside the selected project's .threatmodel directory.

Validation and analysis tools generally return text through MCP rather than writing report files. The exported files are snapshots; the server does not automatically reload them when a new process starts.

Quick Reference

Essential Tools for Getting Started

Tool

Purpose

Example

manage_workflow(action="plan")

Get comprehensive plan

Start here for overview

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="1")

Get focused Phase 1 guidance

Recommended starting point

manage_workflow(action="status")

Check progress

Track completion status

manage_system_context(action, section, ...)

Define business context and taxonomy profiles

action="set", section="all"

manage_assumptions(action, ...)

Document and maintain assumptions

Start with action="describe"

manage_architecture(action, section, ...)

Manage components, data-store nodes, and connections

Start with action="describe"

manage_threat_actors(action, ...)

Assess and analyze threat actors

Use action="update" for relevance and priority

manage_trust_boundaries(action, section, ...)

Manage zones, crossings, and boundaries

Use action="detection_plan" for guidance

manage_asset_flows(action, section, ...)

Manage assets and flows

Sections are assets and flows

manage_threats(action, section, ...)

Manage threats, mitigations, links, and residual-risk decisions

Use action="assess" in Phase 8

manage_code_validation(action, values)

Record and report code-validation evidence

Start with action="describe"

export_threat_model()

Execute Phase 9 export

Generates JSON and Markdown snapshots

🚀 Step-by-Step Guidance

Recommended Approach: Use the consolidated guidance tool for one phase at a time:

Phase

Tool

Purpose

1

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="1")

Business Context Analysis

2

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="2")

Architecture Analysis

3

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="3")

Threat Actor Analysis

4

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="4")

Trust Boundary Analysis

5

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="5")

Asset Flow Analysis

6

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="6")

Threat Identification

7

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="7")

Mitigation Planning

7.5

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="7.5")

Guided Code Validation (Optional)

8

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="8")

Residual Risk Analysis

9

manage_workflow(action="guidance", phase="9")

Output Generation and Documentation

Tools Overview

The Threat Modeling MCP Server provides 11 tools organized into the following categories:

Category

Tools

Description

Workflow

2 tools

Plan and guide the workflow, track or advance phases, and export the result

System Context

1 tool

Manage business context plus software, data, user, and NFR taxonomy profiles

Domain Managers

6 tools

Manage assumptions, architecture, actors, boundaries, asset flows, threats, and mitigations

Data Model Types

1 tool

Explore available enum models and accepted values

Code Validation

1 tool

Record evidence, apply statuses, validate coverage, and render reports

Threat Modeling Methodology

STRIDE Framework

The server uses the STRIDE methodology for systematic threat identification:

Category

Description

Example Threats

Spoofing

Impersonating someone or something else

Authentication bypass, identity theft

Tampering

Modifying data or code

Data corruption, code injection

Repudiation

Claiming to have not performed an action

Log tampering, non-repudiation failures

Information Disclosure

Exposing information to unauthorized users

Data leaks, privacy breaches

Denial of Service

Denying or degrading service

Resource exhaustion, availability attacks

Elevation of Privilege

Gaining capabilities without authorization

Privilege escalation, unauthorized access

Threat Modeling Process

The comprehensive threat modeling process includes these phases:

  • Phase 1 - Business Context Analysis: Understanding the business value and criticality of the system

  • Phase 2 - Architecture Analysis: Connecting every component and data-store node

  • Phase 3 - Threat Actor Analysis: Identifying potential adversaries and their capabilities

  • Phase 4 - Trust Boundary Analysis: Assigning every node to a zone and mapping inter-zone connections

  • Phase 5 - Asset Flow Analysis: Tracking every critical asset through at least one flow

  • Phase 6 - Threat Identification: Systematically identifying potential threats using STRIDE

  • Phase 7 - Mitigation Planning: Linking at least one mitigation to every threat

  • Phase 7.5 - Code Validation Analysis (optional): Recording implementation evidence for every threat and mitigation

  • Phase 8 - Residual Risk Analysis: Recording a current decision, residual ratings, and rationale for every threat

  • Phase 9 - Output Generation and Documentation: Exporting current JSON and Markdown snapshots

Each phase includes specific objectives, activities, and outputs to guide the threat modeling process.

Threat Severity Levels

  • Critical: Immediate action required, system compromise likely

  • High: Significant risk, should be addressed quickly

  • Medium: Moderate risk, address in normal development cycle

  • Low: Minor risk, address when convenient

Threat Likelihood Levels

  • Very Likely: Expected to occur

  • Likely: More likely than not

  • Possible: Plausible given the right conditions

  • Unlikely: Would require unusual circumstances

Mitigation Types

  • Preventive: Controls that prevent threats from occurring

  • Detective: Controls that detect when threats occur

  • Corrective: Controls that respond to and correct threats

  • Deterrent: Controls that discourage an attacker from attempting the threat

Assumptions in Threat Modeling

Assumptions are statements that we accept as true without requiring further validation. They help scope the threat model by establishing boundaries and constraints. Common examples include:

  • "All network connections in the VPC are encrypted in transit"

  • "AWS KMS keys cannot be discovered by brute force"

  • "Nation-state threat actors are not a concern for this system"

By documenting assumptions, we can:

  • Prevent generating pointless threats

  • Avoid recommending unnecessary mitigations

  • Focus on relevant security concerns

  • Clearly document the scope and limitations of the threat model

Development

Contributing

To contribute to this project:

  1. Clone the repository

  2. Create a virtual environment with uv venv

  3. Activate it with source .venv/bin/activate (Windows PowerShell: .venv\Scripts\Activate.ps1)

  4. Install the package and test dependencies with uv pip install -e '.[test]'

  5. Run the server locally with python run_server.py

  6. Run tests with python -m pytest

Security

See CONTRIBUTING for more information.

License

This project is licensed under the Apache-2.0 License. See the LICENSE file for details.

Available Tools

11 tools
export_threat_modelC

Export strict Threat Composer JSON and Markdown plus a state summary.

Inputs: output_path, include_extended_data. Returns: result

inspect_data_modelsA

List enum models or inspect the accepted values for one model.

Inputs: model_name. Returns: result

manage_architectureC

Manage architecture components, connections, and data stores.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +2 more. Returns: result

manage_asset_flowsC

Manage assets and the flows that carry them.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +2 more. Returns: result

manage_assumptionsD

Manage assumptions through one compact action-based tool.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +1 more. Returns: result

manage_code_validationA

Record and report evidence-based Phase 7.5 code validation.

Start with action="describe" for the finding contract. The tool does not inspect source code; it validates findings, updates statuses atomically, tracks complete coverage, and renders the final report.

Inputs: action (required), values. Returns: result

manage_system_contextB

Manage all Phase 1 business context and classification profiles.

Start with action="describe" to get the payload contract without loading every taxonomy field into this tool schema. A complete Phase 1 context can be submitted in one call with action="set", section="all". Values are checked by the canonical enum validators and Pydantic profile models.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +2 more. Returns: result

manage_threat_actorsC

Manage threat actors and run the actor analysis.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +1 more. Returns: result

manage_threatsC

Manage threats, mitigations, and their links.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +2 more. Returns: result

manage_trust_boundariesC

Manage zones, crossing points, boundaries, and their relationships.

Inputs: action (required), items, values, item_id, +2 more. Returns: result

manage_workflowC

Plan, guide, inspect, configure, or advance the workflow.

Inputs: action (required), phase, directory, auto_validate_code. Returns: result

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Loading tool schema changelog…

    TDQS

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 11 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct threat-modeling domain or lifecycle action: assumptions, workflow orchestration, system context, architecture, actors, trust boundaries, asset flows, threats/mitigations, code validation, data-model inspection, and export. The manage_* tools share a verb but have clearly separate nouns and descriptions, so an agent should not confuse them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names use snake_case and a consistent verb_noun pattern: manage_*, inspect_data_models, and export_threat_model. The repetition of manage_* is predictable rather than confusing.

    Tool Count5/5

    Eleven tools is well-scoped for a threat-modeling workflow. The count reflects distinct lifecycle phases and entities without obvious redundancy or missing operations.

    Completeness5/5

    The surface covers the full threat-modeling lifecycle: assumptions, workflow, business context, architecture, actors, trust boundaries, asset flows, threats and mitigations, code validation, data-model inspection, and export. There are no obvious dead ends for the stated domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo recent community issues

    Related MCP Connectors

    Related MCP Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI-powered security scanning of codebases through conversational analysis, allowing users to assess, threat model, code review, DAST test, and generate security reports using natural language with Claude.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI-powered threat modeling with tools for creating threat models, analyzing security threats, generating security controls, and validating architecture against best practices.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Automates 85-95% of the Secure Software Development Lifecycle (SSDLC) planning phase through multi-role AI orchestration, enabling business analysis, threat modeling, test strategy design, and security code review.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables developers and product owners to scan a codebase and extract a readable business overview—features, roles, access control, data model, and endpoints—along with findings on missing or inconsistent rules, and generate shareable HTML or Markdown reports and diagrams.
      9
      2
      MIT