Skip to main content
Glama
threadlinqs-cmd

Intel Threadlinqs MCP

Hunt (TLQL)

hunt
Read-onlyIdempotent

Run deterministic SIEM-style queries over 106k pre-joined threat observations to aggregate or cross-reference tools, malware, IOCs, MITRE, CVE, and infrastructure.

Instructions

Run a deterministic SIEM-style query over the pre-joined observation index (~106k rows across tool, malware, ioc, mitre, cve, attribution, dns and infra observations). Use this INSTEAD of chaining many search_threats calls when the question is an aggregate ("how many X grouped by Y") or crosses observation types ("threats using tool A that also have IOC type B"). Append "| stats count by " to aggregate; without it you get matching rows. A threat contributes one row per observation, so for "how many THREATS" use "| stats count_distinct(threat) by " — plain count double-counts. Operators are = != > < >= <= LIKE CONTAINS IN "NOT IN"; quote any value with a hyphen (cve = "CVE-2024-3400"). Call hunt_schema first if you do not know the field names.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRow cap for non-stats queries (default 50, max 100). In stats mode it caps the number of GROUPS returned. Check `has_more` in the response.
queryYesTLQL, e.g. `tool = "cobalt strike" AND sector = "healthcare" | stats count by nation`

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
byNo
funcNo
modeYes'stats' when the query has a | stats pipe, otherwise rows.
rowsNo
countNoRows RETURNED, not rows matched.
limitNo
queryYes
groupsNo
columnsNo
has_moreNoTrue when rows (or, in stats mode, groups) were cut at the limit.
tier_gated_includedNoTrue when the caller's tier allows the c2_beacon/dns/infra observation types.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: deterministic semantics, row-per-observation behavior, stats vs non-stats output, count_distinct to avoid double-counting, operator list, and hyphen-quoting rule. These details are not visible in annotations or schema alone.

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?

Although dense, every sentence adds distinct operational guidance: when to use, how to aggregate, how to avoid double counting, supported operators, and required validation. There is no wasteful filler, and the most important usage signal is front-loaded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity, the description covers the full calling context: when to use, what the query does, how aggregation works, edge cases like hyphenated values, and the need to consult hunt_schema. The output is covered by the output schema and has_more reference, so the agent has everything needed to invoke correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema describes the parameters, but the description adds practical semantics for the query parameter: example TLQL, supported operators, quoting rules, stats syntax, and the count_distinct caveat. The limit parameter is also explained in the schema, while the description deepens the understanding of query behavior beyond the schema examples.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Run a deterministic SIEM-style query') and a specific resource ('pre-joined observation index'), and clarifies the kind of questions it answers: aggregates or queries crossing observation types. It explicitly contrasts with search_threats, making sibling differentiation clear.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says to use this tool INSTEAD of chaining many search_threats calls for aggregate questions or cross-observation-type questions. It also instructs calling hunt_schema first when fields are unknown, going beyond a simple 'when to use' statement.

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/threadlinqs-cmd/intelthreadlinqs-mcp'

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