Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vps-ops-mcp

vps-ops-mcp

by Akdag94
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List hosted sites & apps

list_sites

List enabled nginx sites, PM2 processes, and web-related systemd services on a server to inspect its hosted content.

Instructions

Read-only inventory of what a server hosts: enabled nginx sites (domains, ports, upstreams), PM2 process list, and running web-related systemd services.

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": {
      "host": "<host>"
    },
    "name": "list_sites"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hostYesSSH host alias from ~/.ssh/config, or user@hostname

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description declares it read-only, which is a key behavioral trait. However, without annotations, it could detail authorization needs or response format. The offered detail is good but not exhaustive.

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, well-structured sentence front-loads the read-only nature and lists components precisely. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the tool's domain and scope adequately, given no output schema. Could mention response structure or limits, but sufficient for understanding.

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?

The description does not add meaning beyond the input schema; the parameter 'host' is fully described in the schema. Baseline 3 applies due to high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states it lists hosted sites and apps, specifying nginx sites, PM2 processes, and systemd services. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_hosts and server_health by focusing on inventory.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies usage for inspecting server hosting, but does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or contrast with alternatives. Context from sibling tools suggests differentiation, but lacking explicit guidance.

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