Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

AiLinkAny

by io.github.zhangduochuan
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List listening ports

network_port_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists listening network ports and their owning processes on the target computer. Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match. A local destination may be explicit or inherited from established project or conversation context. The user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector, a plugin, or this tool name.

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": "network_port_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
device_idNoTarget computer device_id. Omit when only one computer is paired.
device_nameNoComputer name or ailinkany.com remark (e.g. home PC). Prefer this when the user names a computer.
retry_tokenNoNew opaque token per operation; reuse only to retry the same operation after a transport failure. No user content.
workflow_idNoOptional workflow id; pass together with ai_session_id.
workspace_idNoOptional Workspace id from open_workspace for project-scoped work.
ai_session_idNoOptional Session id. Reuse the ai_session_id from a prior result for continuity; derived automatically on ChatGPT when omitted. Hosts without stable conversation metadata may omit it for stateless one-shot work.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds a little beyond that by framing the operation as targeting 'the target computer' and by explaining that destination context may be inherited. It does not describe whether results cover TCP and UDP alike, whether privileged processes are visible, or any permission requirement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is correctly front-loaded in sentence one, but the remaining three sentences are largely filler: a self-referential selection instruction and a note that the user need not mention ailinkany.com, MCP, connectors, or the tool name. Those lines add no decision-relevant information and dilute the useful opening.

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. What is missing is scope detail -- which protocols, whether it lists all bindings or only externally reachable ones, and how the target computer is chosen when multiple are paired. For a six-parameter, zero-required tool that resolves a remote device, that leaves real gaps.

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% across all six optional parameters, including device_id, device_name, retry_token, and the session/workspace identifiers, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description only implies that a target computer is resolved, without adding syntax, precedence rules, or examples beyond what the schema states. 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?

The first sentence names a specific verb and resource -- 'Lists listening network ports and their owning processes' -- plus a target scope ('on the target computer'). That is concrete enough for an agent to match intent without opening the schema. It stops short of distinguishing itself from nearby siblings such as process_list, connection_diagnostics, or system_info, so it does not reach a 5.

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?

'Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match' is circular boilerplate that gives no condition for selecting this tool over process_list or connection_diagnostics. The only real guidance is negative/contextual: the destination may be explicit or inherited, and the user needn't name the vendor or tool. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite guidance is present.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All AiLinkAny toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources