Retrieve the list of hosts within specified Zabbix groups using group IDs. Provide one or multiple group IDs to get host details, with an optional limit on the number of results returned.
查询群组内的主机列表。需先通过hostgroup_get获取groupid
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 返回数量（默认50） | |
| groupids | Yes | 群组ID（单个或逗号分隔多个） |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. The term '查询' (query) implies a read-only operation accurately, and the prerequisite about obtaining groupid is disclosed. However, it does not describe side effects, authorization needs, pagination behavior beyond the schema default, or any special result characteristics beyond '主机列表'.
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 one sentence, front-loads the primary purpose, and then provides the necessary prerequisite. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler. This is an appropriately concise and well-structured description for a simple query tool.
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 has only two parameters, an output schema, and a straightforward read operation. The description supplies the key prerequisite and the core purpose. It is slightly incomplete in not addressing how to choose this tool over sibling tools like host_get, but otherwise it is sufficient given the low complexity and existing schema.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context for the groupids parameter by stating it must be obtained via hostgroup_get, but it does not expand on the limit parameter or provide additional semantics beyond the schema. The schema already documents defaults and types adequately.
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 states a specific verb and resource: '查询群组内的主机列表' (query host list within a group). It clearly identifies the operation and scope, but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like host_get or hostgroup_get, so it is clear but lacks explicit sibling distinction.
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 provides a useful prerequisite: '需先通过hostgroup_get获取groupid' (must first get the groupid via hostgroup_get). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as host_get, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative routing. The guidance is implied but not comprehensive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.