Skip to main content
Glama
AnuwatThisuka

CMMS MCP Server

get_sensors

Retrieve IoT sensor data from manufacturing systems. Filter sensors by type, status, or equipment to monitor operational conditions and maintenance needs.

Instructions

Get sensors from IoT system. Can filter by type, status, or equipment.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoFilter by sensor type
statusNoFilter by sensor status
equipmentIdNoFilter by equipment ID

Implementation Reference

  • The handleGetSensors method implements the logic for the get_sensors tool by filtering mockSensors based on optional arguments (type, status, equipmentId) and returning the result as a text content object.
    private handleGetSensors(args: {
      type?: string;
      status?: string;
      equipmentId?: string;
    }) {
      let sensors = [...mockSensors];
    
      if (args.equipmentId) {
        sensors = sensors.filter((s) => s.equipmentId === args.equipmentId);
      }
      if (args.type) {
        sensors = sensors.filter((s) => s.type === args.type);
      }
      if (args.status) {
        sensors = sensors.filter((s) => s.status === args.status);
      }
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(sensors, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
  • src/index.ts:257-275 (registration)
    The get_sensors tool is registered in the IoT Tools section of the MCP server, including its schema definition and description.
    {
      name: "get_sensors",
      description:
        "Get sensors from IoT system. Can filter by type, status, or equipment.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          type: {
            type: "string",
            enum: [
              "temperature",
              "pressure",
              "vibration",
              "humidity",
              "flow",
              "level",
            ],
            description: "Filter by sensor type",
          },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, yet the description discloses minimal behavioral traits. It omits: what happens when called with no arguments (returns all sensors?), pagination behavior, return format, and whether this is a cached or real-time operation. For a read operation with zero required parameters, this lack of behavioral context is a significant gap.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundant words. The structure front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence and lists capabilities in the second. Efficient, though sparse on information density.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Inadequate given the tool ecosystem complexity (11 sibling tools including similar getters) and lack of annotations/output schema. The description fails to clarify scope boundaries, distinguish from get_sensor_readings, or explain the 'all optional' parameter behavior (empty query behavior).

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%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description lists the three filterable fields ('type, status, or equipment') but adds no semantic depth beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., explaining equipment relationships or enum value implications).

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

Purpose3/5

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

States the basic action ('Get sensors') and domain ('IoT system'), but fails to differentiate from similar sibling tools like get_sensor_readings (which likely retrieves time-series data vs. this tool retrieving sensor metadata/configurations) or get_devices/get_equipment.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_sensor_readings or get_devices. The phrase 'Can filter by...' describes capability rather than usage strategy or prerequisites.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AnuwatThisuka/cmms-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server