Skip to main content
Glama
x746b

Windows Forensics MCP Server

by x746b

hunt_ioc

Search for indicators of compromise across Windows forensic artifacts, including Prefetch, event logs, and registry. Identifies where the IOC appears and checks for known malware via optional YARA scanning.

Instructions

Hunt for IOC (hash, filename, IP, domain) across all forensic artifacts. Searches Prefetch, Amcache, SRUM, MFT, USN Journal, Browser History, EVTX logs, and optionally YARA rules. Answers: Where does this IOC appear? Was this file/hash/domain seen on the system? Is it known malware?

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
iocYesThe indicator to search for: MD5/SHA1/SHA256 hash, filename, IP address, or domain
artifacts_dirYesBase directory containing forensic artifacts. Tool will auto-detect common paths.
ioc_typeNoType of IOC (auto-detected if not specified)auto
time_range_startNoISO format datetime - filter events after this time
time_range_endNoISO format datetime - filter events before this time
yara_scanNoIf True, scan the file with YARA rules when IOC is a filename and file is found. Provides threat intelligence (is it known malware?).
prefetch_pathNoOverride auto-detected Prefetch directory path
amcache_pathNoOverride auto-detected Amcache.hve path
srum_pathNoOverride auto-detected SRUDB.dat path
mft_pathNoOverride auto-detected $MFT path
usn_pathNoOverride auto-detected USN Journal path
evtx_pathNoOverride auto-detected EVTX directory path
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions searching multiple artifacts, auto-detection of paths, and optional YARA scanning, but does not state if the tool is read-only, its performance impact, or any side effects. The description gives moderate behavioral insight but leaves gaps.

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?

The description is three sentences: purpose, artifacts covered, and example questions. It is front-loaded and efficient, but could be more structured by separating parameter hints. Still, it is concise and easy to parse.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description provides a good overview but lacks details on output format, error handling, or behavior when artifacts are missing. It answers conceptual questions but leaves implementation details unspecified.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds context by listing the artifact types searched, which aligns with the override path parameters, but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool hunts for IOCs (hash, filename, IP, domain) across multiple forensic artifacts, listing specific ones (Prefetch, Amcache, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools that parse single artifacts (e.g., disk_parse_mft) by offering a comprehensive search. The purpose is specific and actionable.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description includes example questions that indicate when to use the tool (e.g., 'Where does this IOC appear?'). It implies it is for cross-artifact hunting, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for single-artifact analysis. Guidance is clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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/x746b/winforensics-mcp'

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