AI agents call my_tool as a supporting operation in Kiln workflows.
With no description and a generic placeholder name, it is impossible to determine what this tool does. Confidence is very low. Defaulting to 'Other' with low severity given the complete absence of evidence, while noting the server context involves 3D printer control which could imply physical-world effects if misused.
From the tool's definition Tool name is 'my_tool' with an empty description, providing no actionable information about what the tool does.
Attacks that exploit this kind of access
my_tool. It is categorised as a Other tool in the Kiln MCP Server, which means it performs auxiliary operations.
Register the Kiln MCP server in PolicyLayer and add a rule for my_tool: allow, deny, rate-limit, or require approval. Point your MCP client at the PolicyLayer proxy URL and the rule is enforced on every call, before it reaches Kiln. Nothing to install.
my_tool is a Other tool with low risk. Read-only tools are generally safe to allow by default.
Yes. Add a rate_limit block to the my_tool rule in your PolicyLayer policy. For example, setting max: 10 and window: 60 limits the tool to 10 calls per minute. Rate limits are tracked per agent session and reset automatically.
Set action: deny in the PolicyLayer policy for my_tool. The AI agent will receive a policy violation error and cannot call the tool. You can also include a reason field to explain why the tool is blocked.
my_tool is provided by the Kiln MCP server (codeofaxel/Kiln). PolicyLayer sits as a proxy in front of this server to enforce policies before tool calls reach the server.
Every MCP server has a record like this.
Type a name, get the same breakdown: verified identity, auth posture, risk grade, capabilities, recommended policy.
Teams ship this data inside their own products. See what a licence covers →