mcp-vmwhere

列出叢集

list_clusters

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists vCenter clusters with totals, DRS/HA enabled counts, and each cluster's ID, name, and DRS/HA settings.

Instructions

列出 vCenter 中的叢集(Cluster)。

回傳 total、啟用 DRS／HA 的叢集數,以及每個叢集的 id、名稱與 DRS／HA 設定。

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": "list_clusters"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`total`	Yes
`clusters`	Yes
`ha_enabled_count`	Yes
`drs_enabled_count`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint. The description adds a summary of the return payload (total, DRS/HA-enabled count, and per-cluster details), but because an output schema exists, this is partly redundant. It provides some useful behavioral context but not rich detail like pagination or rate limits.

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?

The description is two compact sentences. The first states the core action, and the second lists the return fields efficiently. No unnecessary wording is present.

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 parameterless list tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential action and return summary. It is nearly complete, though it could mention whether all clusters are returned (e.g., pagination behavior) for full clarity.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add anything here.

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 states a specific verb and resource: '列出 vCenter 中的叢集(Cluster)' (List clusters in vCenter). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_vms, list_hosts, and list_datacenters, which list different resource types.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource name: an agent can infer it should call this tool when it needs a list of clusters. However, the description offers no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives or any preconditions, so it falls short of a 4.

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

Deploy Server