windows-debug-mcp

by emyk

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

get_system_overview

Retrieve Windows edition, build, uptime, CPU, RAM, board, and firmware details to begin system diagnostics.

Instructions

What this machine is: Windows edition and build, uptime, CPU, RAM, board and firmware.

Start here. The build number decides which known issues apply, and the uptime tells you whether a "fix" has actually been through a reboot.

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": "get_system_overview"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It accurately describes the output without implying any side effects. The tool is read-only by nature, and the description is sufficient.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a brief list. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the purpose.

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 the output schema exists (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. It provides the essential context of what the tool returns and why it should be used first.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has no parameters. According to the rubric, 0 parameters baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info.

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 that the tool returns Windows edition, build, uptime, CPU, RAM, board, and firmware. It positions itself as the starting point for system diagnostics ('Start here.'), which indicates its specific role among siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It says 'Start here,' which provides a clear usage guideline to use this tool first. It also explains why build and uptime matter. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools.

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