Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Hex-Rays IDA MCP

Hex-Rays IDA MCP

by zy723
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

List imports

imports
Read-only

List imported functions and their module names with offset/count pagination to inspect binary dependencies.

Instructions

List imports with module names using offset/count pagination.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "offset": "<offset>",
      "count": "<count>"
    },
    "name": "imports"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesMaximum rows (0 returns all imports)
offsetYesStarting pagination index (default: 0)
instance_idNoOptional database instance id. If omitted, use the current target.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv20261008.0.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It mentions offset/count pagination, but that is already spelled out in the schema, and it discloses nothing about ordering, result size, or instance scoping.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Everything stated is relevant to invoking the tool, and nothing is padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still, for a tool with a near-identical sibling (imports_query), the description omits the one piece of context an agent most needs: how it differs.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents offset, count (including the '0 returns all' semantics), and the optional instance_id. The description repeats the pagination framing without adding syntax or defaults, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List imports') plus the distinguishing payload detail 'with module names'. However, it never differentiates itself from the sibling imports_query, leaving the agent to guess which listing tool to pick.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as imports_query. The agent gets no help deciding between the two import-related tools.

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