qnx-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

QNX target status

target_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Checks a QNX target's state: running, stopped or booting, IP, arch, RAM, CPUs, host key policy, and SSH probe with uname, clock, and dumper status. Use before deploys or after target_down errors.

Instructions

State of one target: running/stopped/booting, IP, arch, RAM, CPUs, host key policy and, when running, an SSH probe with uname, the target clock, whether dumper is running and with which core naming. Use it before deploy_and_run and after target_down or ssh_failed errors.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "target_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Target name such as 'tb' (lowercase letters, digits, '-', '_'); must be inside the server allowlist

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: the tool performs a live SSH probe only when the target is running, and reports uname, clock, dumper state and core naming. It does not mention timeout or auth prerequisites for the probe, which is the remaining gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its returned fields, followed by the usage trigger. The field enumeration is a long run-on list but each item is informative rather than filler.

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 single-parameter read tool with full annotations and an output schema, the definition covers purpose, timing and the conditional SSH probe behavior. Only minor operational details (probe timeout, what happens if the target is unreachable) are absent, and the output schema carries the return shape.

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% and the single 'name' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the character rules and allowlist constraint. The description adds no meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('State of one target') and enumerates the concrete fields returned: running/stopped/booting, IP, arch, RAM, CPUs, host key policy, plus the SSH probe details. The 'one target' scoping implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling target_list, so an agent can pick correctly without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly routes usage: call before deploy_and_run, and after target_down or ssh_failed errors. That is concrete when-to-use guidance tied to named sibling tools and error conditions. It stops short of naming the alternative for bulk inspection (target_list) or stating when not to call it, so it falls just short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.