Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vibeMK

vibeMK

by chexma
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

vibemk_bulk_create_service_groups

Create multiple service groups in one operation by supplying names and aliases. Reduces manual setup for CheckMK monitoring configurations.

Instructions

🔧 Bulk create service groups - Create multiple service groups at once

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": {
      "entries": "<entries>"
    },
    "name": "vibemk_bulk_create_service_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entriesYesList of service groups to create

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.10

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It states the mutation ('create') but does not mention important operational details such as duplicate handling, partial failure behavior, validation, or whether changes require activation.

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 compact and free of filler. It conveys the essential purpose in two short phrases and does not waste words.

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?

The tool is a simple bulk-create operation with a low-complexity schema. However, the absence of any output schema or return-value description leaves the agent guessing about success/failure reporting and response format, so completeness is only moderate.

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 input schema provides basic descriptions for `entries`, `name`, and `alias`, and the description adds no further semantic detail. Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, but no extra value is added.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Create'), a resource ('service groups'), and a distinguishing scope ('multiple at once'). It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling single-create tool `vibemk_create_service_group`.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description implies batch usage ('Create multiple service groups at once') but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over the sibling `vibemk_create_service_group` or other bulk operations. No prerequisites or trade-offs are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools