Skip to main content
Glama
JaxonDigital

Optimizely DXP MCP Server

by JaxonDigital

health_check

Verify Optimizely DXP MCP server health status before critical operations by checking telemetry, API rate limits, active monitors, and system resources.

Instructions

🏥 Check MCP server overall health status. REAL-TIME: 1-2s. Returns telemetry status, API rate limit info, active background monitors count, and system resource usage. Use this to verify server is operating normally before critical operations. No parameters. Returns health metrics and component status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdNo
projectNameNo
apiKeyNo
apiSecretNo
debugNoInclude debug information (process ID, session ID, etc.)

Implementation Reference

  • Registration of the 'health_check' tool in the tool availability matrix, available for all hosting types in Setup & Connection category with description 'Comprehensive health check of your setup'
    'health_check': {
        hostingTypes: ['dxp-paas', 'dxp-saas', 'self-hosted', 'unknown'],
        category: 'Setup & Connection',
        description: 'Comprehensive health check of your setup'
    },
  • NLP parser pattern that maps natural language inputs like 'health', 'ping', 'alive' to invoke the 'health_check' tool
    { pattern: /^(health|ping|alive)/i, tool: 'health_check', category: 'health' },
  • Potential implementation or supporting function for health checks: forceHealthCheck method that performs endpoint and system health checks and returns HealthStatus. Matches the 'comprehensive health check' description.
        async forceHealthCheck(): Promise<HealthStatus> {
            await this.checkEndpointHealth();
            this.checkSystemHealth();
            return this.getHealthStatus();
        }
    }
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior: real-time operation (1-2s), what information it returns (telemetry status, API rate limit info, etc.), and that it has no parameters. It doesn't mention authentication requirements or rate limits, but covers the core operational behavior well.

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 efficiently structured with three sentences that each serve distinct purposes: stating the tool's function, specifying its behavior and return values, and providing usage guidance. There's no wasted language, and the information is front-loaded appropriately.

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 no-parameter health check tool with no output schema, the description provides good completeness by explaining what information is returned and when to use it. The main gap is the mismatch between 'No parameters' in the description and the 5-parameter input schema, which creates some ambiguity about actual usage requirements.

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 description states 'No parameters' which directly addresses the parameter semantics. However, the input schema shows 5 parameters with only 20% description coverage. The description compensates by clarifying that no parameters are needed for the health check operation, though it doesn't explain why the schema includes parameters like projectId or apiKey.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Check MCP server overall health status' with specific components like telemetry status, API rate limit info, active background monitors count, and system resource usage. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'test_connection' or 'get_rate_limit_status' by providing a comprehensive health overview rather than specific functionality.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this to verify server is operating normally before critical operations.' This provides clear context for usage and distinguishes it from other monitoring tools like 'get_monitoring_stats' or 'get_cache_status' which serve different purposes.

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/JaxonDigital/optimizely-dxp-mcp'

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