Skip to main content
Glama

diagnostics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read startup and runtime status, log tails, versions, CUDA state, and viewer URL/port to troubleshoot issues without exposing secrets or environment values.

Instructions

Read-only startup/runtime diagnostics, available even while starting: stage/substage/waiting_for, startup.log tail, versions, CUDA state (if probed), viewer URL/port and log tail. No secrets or environment values.

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": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "diagnostics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYesTool arguments object (all fields documented; Z is positive upward).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely useful context: usability while still starting, conditional CUDA probing, and an explicit 'no secrets or environment values' privacy note. It does not describe output shape or failure modes, but it adds real value beyond the annotations.

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?

One dense but front-loaded sentence with no filler; the read-only nature leads and the privacy constraint closes. Slightly packed with comma-separated items, but every clause earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description's enumeration of returned fields is exactly what an agent needs to know what comes back. Combined with the privacy note and while-starting availability, this covers the essentials for a simple diagnostic read.

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?

The single 'lines' parameter has full schema description including bounds (1–500) and default, and the description never mentions it. With 100% schema coverage the schema carries this burden, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Read-only startup/runtime diagnostics') and enumerates the exact contents (stage/substage/waiting_for, startup.log tail, versions, CUDA state, viewer URL/port). This clearly separates it from job_status/job_logs/start, though it doesn't name those siblings explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'available even while starting' gives one implied usage condition (reach for it during boot/runtime issues), but there is no explicit when-not guidance and no named alternative tools for log or status inspection.

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