Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cve-search_mcp

cve-search_mcp

by roadwy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

vul_db_update_status

Check the status and last update timestamps of databases used by the CVE-Search API to ensure accurate and current vulnerability data.

Instructions

To get more information about the current databases in use and when it was updated

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "vul_db_update_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • main.py:72-78 (handler)
    Handler function for the 'vul_db_update_status' tool, decorated with @mcp.tool() for registration. Fetches database update status from the CVE search API using get_requests helper.
    @mcp.tool()
def vul_db_update_status() -> Dict[str, Any]:
    """
    To get more information about the current databases in use and when it was updated
    """
    uri = f"dbInfo"
    return get_requests(uri)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
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 vaguely indicates a read operation ('get more information') but doesn't specify what 'more information' entails, whether it requires authentication, rate limits, or how it interacts with databases. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that is concise but under-specified. It wastes no words, but the lack of detail means it doesn't fully earn its place. It could be more front-loaded with critical information, but it's not overly verbose.

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 the complexity of database status tools, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'more information' includes, the format of the response, or how it relates to sibling tools. This leaves the agent with insufficient context for effective use.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately avoids mentioning any. This meets the baseline for a parameterless tool, though it doesn't exceed expectations by explaining implicit inputs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'To get more information about the current databases in use and when it was updated' restates the tool name 'vul_db_update_status' in different words, making it tautological. It doesn't specify a clear action verb beyond 'get information' or distinguish this tool from its siblings like 'vul_last_cves' or 'vul_vendors', which might also provide database-related information.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It doesn't mention alternatives, prerequisites, or specific contexts for usage, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool name alone. This lack of explicit direction reduces its utility in tool selection.

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

Related Tools