Skip to main content
Glama

get_threat_models_report

Retrieve threat models report data to analyze security risks and vulnerabilities within specified time periods.

Instructions

Get threat models report data

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
startNo
endNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler function for 'get_threat_models_report', decorated with @mcp.tool() which registers it as an MCP tool. It creates an authenticated API client and calls the client's get_threat_models_report method to fetch the report data.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def get_threat_models_report(start: str = None, end: str = None) -> str:
        """Get threat models report data"""
        async with create_client_from_env() as client:
            result = await client.get_threat_models_report(start=start, end=end)
            return str(result)
  • Supporting utility in the DeviciAPIClient class that makes an authenticated HTTP GET request to the '/reports/threat-models' endpoint with optional date range parameters.
    async def get_threat_models_report(
        self, 
        start: Optional[str] = None, 
        end: Optional[str] = None
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Get threat models reports."""
        params = {}
        if start:
            params["start"] = start
        if end:
            params["end"] = end
        return await self._make_request("GET", "/reports/threat-models", params=params)
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits. It doesn't mention if this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or describes the output format, making it inadequate for a tool with parameters and an output schema.

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 concise with a single sentence, but it's under-specified rather than efficiently informative. While front-loaded, it lacks necessary detail, making it too brief for a tool with parameters and siblings, though not 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 tool has 2 parameters with 0% schema coverage, an output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't clarify the tool's purpose relative to siblings, parameter usage, or behavioral context, leaving significant gaps despite the output schema handling return values.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It doesn't explain what 'start' and 'end' parameters represent (e.g., date ranges, IDs), their format, or default behavior, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Get threat models report data' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration, making it a tautology. It specifies the resource ('threat models report data') but lacks a clear verb beyond 'get' and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_threat_models' or 'get_dashboard_data', leaving the scope vague.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_threat_models', 'get_dashboard_data', and 'get_threat_models_by_collection', the description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage ambiguous.

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/sdelements/devici-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server