Skip to main content
Glama

List Services

list_services

Queries systemd service units with load, active, and sub states, optionally filtering by state or name glob and querying the user manager.

Instructions

List systemd service units with load/active/sub state.

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_services"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userNoquery user manager instead of system
limitNo
stateNofilter e.g. 'running', 'failed', 'active', 'exited'
patternNounit name glob like 'nginx*'

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it only says the tool lists units. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, that system-scope queries may require root, that the default limit of 300 may truncate results, or how filtering by state interacts with the pattern glob.

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 or redundancy. It is efficiently written, though the extreme brevity leaves the definition under-specified rather than over-stated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The existence of an output schema means return values need not be explained, and 75% of parameters are documented in the schema. However, for a tool with zero annotations, the description does not cover privilege requirements or the default result cap, which are meaningful gaps for a systemd query.

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 description coverage is 75%, with meaningful descriptions already on user, state, and pattern; only limit is undocumented. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

"List systemd service units" is a specific verb plus resource, and it names the state fields returned (load/active/sub). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like list_processes or package_list_installed, but the resource is unambiguous enough that an agent can select it without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over a process or package listing tool, and no statement of prerequisites such as needing elevated privileges for system-scope queries. Usage is only implied by the name and the word "systemd".

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