Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
homebutler

homebutler

by Higangssh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

processes

Read-only

Lists top processes sorted by CPU or memory usage, including total process count and a separate breakdown of zombie processes, to help diagnose system load.

Instructions

List the top processes by CPU or memory, with a total count and any zombies broken out separately

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": "processes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of processes to return (default: 10, 0 for all)
serverNoRemote server name from config (optional, runs locally if omitted; inside a container a local call is refused, because a container cannot see the machine it is on)
sort_byNoSort by cpu (default) or mem

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.8.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / server / description
      Previous value: -"Remote server name from config (optional, runs locally if omitted)"New value: +"Remote server name from config (optional, runs locally if omitted; inside a container a local call is refused, because a container cannot see the machine it is on)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.41.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +"integer"
  3. Addedv0.22.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior context by disclosing the return shape (total count plus zombies broken out separately), but it omits operational caveats like the container-refusal case, which appears only in the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the sort dimension come first, and the return summary follows. It is arguably too terse for the gaps it leaves, but nothing is wasted.

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 read-only tool with three optional, fully-described parameters and no output schema, the definition covers purpose and what the response contains. The remaining gap is the lack of sibling disambiguation and no mention of host-versus-container behavior, which the agent must find in the schema.

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 100%, so limit, server, and sort_by are already fully documented with defaults and the container caveat. The description's 'by CPU or memory' merely mirrors sort_by and adds no syntax or edge-case meaning beyond the schema.

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 (List) plus resource (processes) and scope (top by CPU or memory), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not name a sibling such as docker_top to differentiate host-level from container-level process listing, so it stops short of a 5.

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 'top processes by CPU or memory' rather than stated: there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to an alternative for container-scoped listing. The only routing logic in the definition lives in the server parameter's schema text, not the description.

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