Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vibeMK

vibeMK

by chexma
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

vibemk_get_timeperiods

List all configured time periods in CheckMK to view when notifications, monitoring, and downtimes are active. Use this to audit and verify time-based configurations.

Instructions

⏰ List time periods - Show all configured time periods

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_timeperiods"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.10

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description says 'List' and 'Show', which strongly implies a read-only operation with no modifications. There are no annotations to rely on, but the wording is sufficiently transparent for a simple listing tool. It does not explicitly state side-effect freedom, but the operation type makes this clear.

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 extremely concise, using a short phrase and one clarifying sentence. It contains no filler or redundant information and is easily scannable.

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 no-argument listing tool, the description is complete enough to understand the operation. It does not describe output format or return details, but this is not critical for such a simple, well-named tool.

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 takes no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The input schema is empty and fully covered by the absence of parameters. The baseline for zero parameters is appropriate.

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 lists time periods and shows all configured ones. This is a specific verb-object pairing, and the name reinforces the read-only intent. It is easily distinguished from sibling create/update/delete timeperiod tools.

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 conveys that the tool is for listing all time periods, so usage is implied. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives or when not to use it. The guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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