Skip to main content
Glama

check_version

Check end-of-life status and support information for software versions to determine security status and upgrade needs.

Instructions

Check EOL status and support information for software versions

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
productYesSoftware product name (e.g., python, nodejs, ubuntu)
versionNoSpecific version to check (e.g., 3.8, 16, 20.04)

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that executes the 'check_version' tool: validates input, fetches EOL cycle data from endoflife.date API for the given product/version, caches the query, and returns the relevant cycle information as JSON.
    private async handleCheckVersion(args: CheckVersionArgs) {
      const { product, version } = args;
    
      // Validate product exists
      if (!this.availableProducts.includes(product)) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Invalid product: ${product}. Use list_products tool to see available products.`
          }],
          isError: true
        };
      }
    
      try {
        const response = await this.axiosInstance.get(`/${product}.json`);
        const cycles = response.data as EOLCycle[];
    
        const filteredCycles = version
          ? cycles.filter(cycle => cycle.cycle.startsWith(version))
          : cycles;
    
        this.recentQueries.unshift({
          product,
          version,
          response: filteredCycles,
          timestamp: new Date().toISOString()
        });
    
        if (this.recentQueries.length > API_CONFIG.MAX_CACHED_QUERIES) {
          this.recentQueries.pop();
        }
    
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(filteredCycles, null, 2)
          }]
        };
      } catch (error) {
        if (axios.isAxiosError(error)) {
          return {
            content: [{
              type: "text",
              text: `EOL API error: ${error.response?.data?.message ?? error.message}`
            }],
            isError: true
          };
        }
        throw error;
      }
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the input arguments for 'check_version' tool and the type guard function to validate them.
    export interface CheckVersionArgs {
      product: string;
      version?: string;
    }
    
    export interface ListProductsArgs {
      filter?: string;
    }
    
    // Type guards
    export function isValidCheckVersionArgs(args: any): args is CheckVersionArgs {
      return (
        typeof args === "object" &&
        args !== null &&
        "product" in args &&
        typeof args.product === "string" &&
        (args.version === undefined || typeof args.version === "string")
      );
    }
  • src/index.ts:285-302 (registration)
    Registration of the 'check_version' tool in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler, including name, description, and JSON schema matching CheckVersionArgs.
    name: "check_version",
    description: "Check EOL status and support information for software versions",
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        product: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Software product name (e.g., python, nodejs, ubuntu)",
          examples: ["python", "nodejs", "ubuntu"]
        },
        version: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Specific version to check (e.g., 3.8, 16, 20.04)",
          examples: ["3.8", "16", "20.04"]
        }
      },
      required: ["product"]
    }
  • Dispatch handler in CallToolRequestSchema that validates arguments using isValidCheckVersionArgs and delegates to the main handleCheckVersion function.
    case "check_version":
      if (!isValidCheckVersionArgs(args)) {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InvalidParams,
          "Invalid version check arguments"
        );
      }
      return this.handleCheckVersion(args);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Check' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data, or handles errors. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool and gets straight to the point with no unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a relatively simple lookup tool with good schema coverage but no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but doesn't provide enough context about behavior, alternatives, or expected outputs to be considered complete. The agent would need to make assumptions about how the tool actually works.

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?

The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's already in the schema (which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions and examples for both parameters). The baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema adequately documents the parameters, though the description could have added context about parameter relationships or validation rules.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Check EOL status and support information') and resource ('software versions'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like 'check_cve' or 'compare_versions' which might have overlapping domains.

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 like 'check_cve' (for vulnerabilities) or 'compare_versions' (for comparisons). There's no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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/ducthinh993/mcp-server-endoflife'

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