Skip to main content
Glama

Read a remote node's hardware board

get_node_board
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the hardware board or model identifier of a remote repeater node.

Instructions

Read a remote repeater's hardware board / model identifier. Equivalent to admin <node> board. Required node. For the home node, use get_node_health() (the firmware.manufacturerModel field) — that's the structured equivalent via the companion protocol, no admin call needed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeYestarget node (contact name or hex public-key prefix); required (this command isn't implemented on companion firmware so it can't target home)
dryRunNopreview the intent without contacting the device

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commandYes
tierYes
annotationsYesthe deterministic per-command risk hints this tier maps to; surfaced here (not as MCP tool-level annotations) because `admin` is one multiplexed tool
dryRunYes
viaNo
previewNo
replyNo
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond equating it to an admin command. No contradiction.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words: first sentence states purpose, second provides usage guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage alternatives, and parameter requirement adequately without missing critical context.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description repeats the schema's note about node not targeting home. No additional meaning added beyond schema, meeting baseline for high coverage.

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 it reads a remote repeater's hardware board/model identifier, distinguishing it from siblings by noting the alternative for home node via get_node_health().

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says node is required, and instructs to use get_node_health() for the home node as a better alternative, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dpup/meshcore-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server