Retrieve CPU, memory, disk usage, and uptime for local or remote servers to assess system health.
Get system status including CPU, memory, disk usage, and uptime
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| server | No | Remote server name from config (optional, runs locally if omitted) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.10.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states what is retrieved but does not mention side effects, required permissions, safety implications (e.g., read-only nature), or limitations on remote server access.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose and scope.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is low-complexity with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the main function but lacks behavioral details and usage guidance, leaving gaps for an agent to fully understand invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%: the single 'server' parameter is described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema's description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource ('Get system status') and lists the metrics included (CPU, memory, disk usage, uptime). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which overlap with system monitoring.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for retrieving system status but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no conditions or prerequisites, and no mention of when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.