mcp-zabbix

by daedalus

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

zabbix_triggerprototype_create

Create trigger prototypes in Zabbix API to automate monitoring condition definitions for hosts.

Instructions

Zabbix API triggerprototype.create 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_triggerprototype_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Apr 18, 2026

TDQS

D1.5/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions nothing about side effects, required permissions, or return values. The agent has no information about tool behavior 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.

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than concise. It could be expanded with useful details without being verbose.

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 complexity of the Zabbix API with many similar sibling tools, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is completely inadequate. It does not provide enough context for correct tool selection or invocation.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the single 'params' parameter. It adds no meaning about what fields or structure the parameter should have.

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?

The description 'Zabbix API triggerprototype.create method' hints at creating a trigger prototype, but does not define what a trigger prototype is or how it differs from similar tools like zabbix_trigger_create. It is almost a tautology of the tool name.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description lacks any indication of when to use this tool instead of alternatives like zabbix_triggerprototype_update or zabbix_trigger_create.

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

Deploy Server