safe-ssh-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_coredumps

Inspect systemd-coredump crash records on a remote Linux host over SSH: list recent core dumps or show details and stack traces for a PID or the latest crash.

Instructions

Inspects crashes (core dumps) recorded by systemd-coredump on a remote Linux host via SSH. command='list' lists the last lines core dumps (time, PID, signal, executable), below the column header. When there are no core dumps, coredumpctl exits with code 1 and ok is False - that is not a failure. command='info' shows details of a core dump (signal, command line, stack trace if available): of the given pid, or of the most recent one when pid is omitted. Optional since limits them to a time window: '30 min ago', '2 hours ago', 'today', 'yesterday' or 'YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS'. Seeing other users' core dumps usually requires root.

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>",
      "user": "<user>"
    },
    "name": "get_coredumps"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`pid`	No
`host`	Yes
`port`	No
`user`	Yes
`lines`	No
`since`	No
`command`	No	list
`timeout`	No
`key_path`	No
`password`	No
`accept_new_hostkey`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.2.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it discloses the SSH transport, that an exit code of 1 with ok=False means 'no dumps' rather than an error, and that reading other users' dumps usually requires root. It omits how authentication is negotiated between password/key_path and what accept_new_hostkey does, which matters for a remote-execution tool.

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 with purpose, then mode-by-mode behavior; each line carries information, especially the 'since' examples and the false-failure note. The multi-line layout is readable, though the mode descriptions could be tightened slightly.

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?

Given 11 parameters, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description covers the operationally critical behavior: modes, time filtering syntax, failure semantics, and privilege requirements. It falls short only on the connection/authentication parameters, which an agent may need to set correctly.

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 coverage is 0% across 11 parameters, so the description must compensate; it explains command, lines, pid, and since with format examples, but leaves host, user, port, timeout, key_path, password, and accept_new_hostkey entirely undocumented in both schema and prose. The non-obvious accept_new_hostkey in particular is left for the agent to guess.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Inspects crashes (core dumps) recorded by systemd-coredump on a remote Linux host via SSH') and immediately differentiates the two operating modes, list and info.

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?

Explicitly explains when to use command='list' versus command='info', including the rule that pid selects a specific dump and omission selects the most recent, plus a concrete 'since' grammar. It does not state when to prefer this over adjacent diagnostic tools such as get_journal_errors or get_dmesg, which is the only gap.

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

Deploy Server