mcp-redfish

get_power

Retrieve power supply status, current consumption in watts, and power capacity for a chassis. Monitor server power health through Redfish BMC.

Instructions

Get power data for a chassis. Returns power supply status, current consumption in watts, and power capacity.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "chassis_id": "<chassis_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_power"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chassis_id`	Yes	Chassis ID (e.g. 'System.Embedded.1'). Use list_chassis to find IDs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the return values are listed. However, it does not explicitly state such traits as 'does not modify the chassis' or mention any prerequisites, errors, or side effects beyond what is implied.

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 two concise sentences that immediately state the purpose and return values. There is no redundant information, and it is well-structured with front-loaded content.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the returned data. It covers the essentials but could be enhanced with a brief note on when to use it relative to set_power_state, though the low complexity keeps this from being a major gap.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters, with a clear description for 'chassis_id' (e.g., 'System.Embedded.1') and a pointer to list_chassis. The tool description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'power data for a chassis', and specifies exactly what is returned (power supply status, current consumption in watts, power capacity). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_thermal (temperature) and set_power_state (changing power state).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage when needing power data for a chassis, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like set_power_state for changing power. The context is clear but exclusions or alternative references are absent.

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

Deploy Server