Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
security-framework-mcp

security-framework-mcp

by zer0-kr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_nist_publication

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search and browse NIST cybersecurity publications (SP 800, FIPS, IR, CSWP series) by ID, series, or keywords.

Instructions

Search or browse NIST cybersecurity publications (SP 800, FIPS, IR, CSWP series).

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": "get_nist_publication"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoPublication ID, e.g. 'SP 800-53'. Omit to list all.
seriesNoFilter by series: SP, FIPS, IR, CSWP
queryNoSearch keywords
limitNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds the scope of series (SP 800, FIPS, IR, CSWP) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or rate limits. The description does not contradict annotations.

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?

Single, efficient sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every part of the description adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers the essential purpose and scope. With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it could briefly mention that omitting 'id' lists all publications, but this is implied by 'search or browse'. Lacks usage guidance against many siblings, but the core functionality is well described.

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 has 75% description coverage with detailed parameter explanations. The description adds context about series (SP 800, FIPS, IR, CSWP), which is already in the schema description for 'series'. No new meaning beyond what schema provides.

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?

Clearly states it searches or browses NIST cybersecurity publications with specific series (SP 800, FIPS, IR, CSWP). Distinguishes from siblings like 'read_publication' and 'search_nist' by specifying the exact resource and action.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implies usage for searching/browsing these series but does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like 'read_publication' for single documents or 'search_nist' for broader NIST content. No exclusion criteria are given.

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