Skip to main content
Glama
arjshiv

Local Utilities MCP Server

by arjshiv

get_hostname

Retrieve the hostname of the machine running the Local Utilities MCP Server to identify the system in network operations.

Instructions

Returns the hostname of the machine running the MCP server.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The anonymous async handler function that implements the core logic of the 'get_hostname' tool. It calls getHostname() to retrieve the system hostname and returns it formatted as MCP text content.
    async () => {
      // Note: Error handling is simplified; the MCP SDK handles basic errors.
      // More complex tools might still need try/catch.
      const hostname = getHostname();
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          // Return plain text for simple values
          text: hostname
        }]
      };
    }
  • The registerHostnameTool function that registers the 'get_hostname' MCP tool on the server, specifying the tool name, description, and handler function.
    export function registerHostnameTool(server: McpServer): void {
      server.tool(
        "get_hostname",
        "Returns the hostname of the machine running the MCP server.",
        async () => {
          // Note: Error handling is simplified; the MCP SDK handles basic errors.
          // More complex tools might still need try/catch.
          const hostname = getHostname();
          return {
            content: [{
              type: "text",
              // Return plain text for simple values
              text: hostname
            }]
          };
        }
      );
    } 
  • Helper utility function that retrieves the hostname using Node.js 'os' module.
    export function getHostname(): string {
      return os.hostname();
    }
  • src/index.ts:19-19 (registration)
    Invocation of registerHostnameTool during server initialization, effectively registering the tool.
    registerHostnameTool(server);
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns the hostname, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires permissions, has rate limits, or what format the hostname is returned in (e.g., FQDN, short name). The description is accurate but lacks depth for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose with zero waste. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse and understand immediately without unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete enough for basic understanding. However, without annotations or output schema, it doesn't address behavioral aspects like return format or error conditions, which could be relevant for an agent invoking it.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description doesn't need to compensate for missing parameter documentation. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as there are no parameters to explain beyond what the schema already covers (none).

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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Returns') and resource ('hostname of the machine running the MCP server'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_public_ip (external IP) or get_node_version (software version). It precisely communicates what the tool does without ambiguity.

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?

The description implies usage context (when you need the hostname of the server machine) but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_public_ip for external network identification. No explicit exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving some inference required.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/arjshiv/localutils-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server