Retrieve active network connections and listening ports to diagnose network issues and monitor system activity. Use the limit parameter to control the number of results returned.
Get active network connections and listening ports
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Number of connections to return (default: 50) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It indicates read-only intent and scopes to 'active' connections, but does not explain output fields, privilege requirements, or how the tool behaves beyond the basic query.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes to purpose, making it an efficient and well-structured definition.
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?
For a read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description is adequate but incomplete: it omits what fields each connection entry contains and provides no usage context. Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail on return structure would help an agent use results effectively.
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?
The input schema fully covers the single parameter (limit) with a description and default value, so the tool description adds no additional parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is 100%.
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?
States a specific action (get) and precise resource ('active network connections and listening ports'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like get_system_resources or list_processes, which target different system domains.
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?
Provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusion criteria. The 'Get' phrasing implies a read operation, but there is no explicit context or comparison with sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.