Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SapperMCP

SapperMCP

by MasterX1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Package Update

package_update

Refresh package lists with sudo apt-get update and a configurable timeout to prepare Linux systems for authorized maintenance and security hardening.

Instructions

Refresh package lists (apt-get update, sudo).

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": "package_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timeoutNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that sudo and apt-get update are involved, hinting at privilege escalation and network access, but it says nothing about whether a password prompt can block execution, what happens on failure, whether the apt cache is modified, or how timeout expiry is handled.

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 short sentence with the action front-loaded and no wasted wording. Its brevity is close to under-specification rather than verbosity, but structurally it is clean.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a sudo-elevated system-mutating command with no annotations and an undocumented timeout parameter, the definition leaves the agent without key operational context such as elevation requirements and failure behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There is one parameter, timeout, with 0% description coverage in the schema and no mention in the description. The default of 300 is only visible in the schema, and the description gives no guidance on when to raise or lower it for slow mirrors.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("Refresh package lists") and even names the underlying command, so the agent knows this updates the apt package index rather than installing. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling package_upgrade, so the read-versus-modify distinction from upgrade is left to inference.

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 statement of when this should be run versus package_upgrade or package_install, and no prerequisites such as needing network access or prior sudo authorization. The only usage signal is the embedded command name, which an agent must interpret itself.

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