Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-zabbix

mcp-zabbix

by daedalus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

zabbix_hostprototype_exists

Checks if specific host prototypes exist in a Zabbix monitoring environment, providing a boolean result to confirm their presence.

Instructions

Zabbix API hostprototype.exists 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_hostprototype_exists"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

D1.5/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided; description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only, side effects, or specific behavior beyond the API method name. Absence of critical safety information.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

Extremely brief single sentence; it lacks structure and fails to provide necessary detail. Under-specification rather than conciseness.

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 number of sibling tools and the output schema, the description is wholly inadequate. It does not clarify return values, input requirements, or how it differs from similar tools.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%; the description does not explain what the 'params' object should contain. The parameter is opaque and requires external knowledge.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description 'Zabbix API hostprototype.exists method' states it uses the Zabbix API method, but does not explicitly state what the tool does (checks existence of host prototypes). It is minimally informative but not a tautology.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus other 'exists' tools (e.g., zabbix_host_exists). No context for usage or exclusions.

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