Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-zabbix

mcp-zabbix

by daedalus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

zabbix_dcheck_delete

Delete discovery checks in Zabbix via API. Remove unwanted discovery checks to streamline monitoring configurations.

Instructions

Zabbix API dcheck.delete method

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": "zabbix_dcheck_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is merely the API method name. It discloses nothing about the tool's behavior—whether deletion is irreversible, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. With no behavioral cues, the agent gets no useful information beyond the name.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise—a single sentence. However, it is under-specified; key information is missing. While not verbose, it does not earn its place as it fails to provide enough value. A score of 3 reflects minimal adequacy with clear gaps.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (a delete operation with a single generic parameter) and the lack of parameter descriptions or behavioral annotations, the description is highly incomplete. It does not clarify what a 'dcheck' is or what the expected input/output are, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning to the 'params' parameter. The parameter is a generic object or null with no explanation of its structure or required fields. The agent cannot infer how to correctly invoke the tool from the description.

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?

The description states 'Zabbix API dcheck.delete method', which specifies the verb (delete) and resource (dcheck). This clearly indicates the tool's action and distinguishes it from sibling tools like dcheck_create or dcheck_get. However, it does not explain what a 'dcheck' is, which may be unclear to agents unfamiliar with Zabbix.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about prerequisites, conditions for deletion, or when not to use it. Among many sibling delete tools, no differentiation is offered.

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