Monitoring AIops

zabbix_hostgroups

Read-only

Retrieve Zabbix host group IDs and names for inventory and maintenance planning, optionally specifying a configured target.

Instructions

[READ] Zabbix host groups (ids + names, for inventory and maintenance).

Args: target: Zabbix target name from config; omit for the default.

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": "zabbix_hostgroups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.9.0Sep 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the '[READ]' tag is redundant with it. The description does add useful disclosure that the result is ids + names rather than full host objects, but says nothing about auth, scope, or pagination.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded and short, with zero filler sentences. The only waste is the redundant '[READ]' prefix already implied by annotations.

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?

For a single-optional-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, context, return shape (ids + names), and the parameter. It is adequate, missing only edge details like empty-result behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it does: 'target: Zabbix target name from config; omit for the default' documents both the origin of the value and the default behavior for the single optional param. Remaining gap is only that it doesn't describe valid target-name format.

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+resource ('Zabbix host groups') and even the payload shape ('ids + names'). This distinguishes it from siblings like zabbix_hosts and zabbix_triggers, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative. Clear enough that an agent knows what resource it reads.

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?

The parenthetical 'for inventory and maintenance' implies a use context, but there are no when/when-not rules and no routing to a sibling tool. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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