Search Windows registry hives for keys or data matching a specific pattern to quickly locate forensic evidence such as persistence mechanisms or user activity.
Search registry values by pattern.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| pattern | Yes | ||
| hive_path | Yes | ||
| search_data | No | ||
| search_names | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -100New value: +50v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Search,' implying read-only, but does not disclose if the tool modifies state, requires special permissions, or returns results with specific structure. Minimal behavioral insight.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It is too brief to convey necessary information, and could be expanded with bullet points or clarifications without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the input format, return value, or constraints like limit behavior. The tool requires much more context for correct use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning 5 parameters are entirely undocumented. The description only mentions 'by pattern,' weakly relating to the pattern parameter. No explanation for hive_path, search_names, search_data, or limit.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Search' and resource 'registry values by pattern.' It implies pattern-based searching, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve specific keys or network-related info. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other search tools like registry_get_key.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as registry_get_key or evtx_search. There is no context on prerequisites or limitations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.