Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vibeMK

vibeMK

by chexma
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

vibemk_get_checkmk_services

List CheckMK services and filter by host name to monitor specific service states.

Instructions

🔧 List services - Show services with optional host filtering

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "vibemk_get_checkmk_services"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
host_nameNoFilter by host name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.10

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'List services'. It does not disclose side effects, rate limits, or return behavior. Since the description carries the full burden without annotations, this minimal information about safety and expected behavior is insufficient.

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, succinct sentence that conveys the essential purpose and key parameter constraint without any fluff. It is well-structured and immediately understandable.

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?

For a simple list operation with one optional filter, the description provides enough context to know what the tool does. It does not describe the output format, but given the simplicity and the absence of an output schema, this is not a critical gap. The tool name further clarifies the intent.

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 schema already describes host_name as 'Filter by host name'. The description adds the word 'optional', clarifying that the parameter is not required. This is a small addition; the core semantics are already covered by the schema, so the description adds only marginal value.

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 action (List) and the resource (services), and mentions the optional host filtering. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_service_status or get_host_status.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where other list or service-related tools would be more appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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