Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Zabbix MCP Server

Zabbix MCP Server

by initMAX
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

configuration_export

Read-only

Export Zabbix hosts, templates, and other configuration objects to YAML, XML, or JSON for backup or migration between Zabbix instances.

Instructions

Export Zabbix configuration as YAML, XML, or JSON. Use this to back up or transfer hosts, templates, and other objects between Zabbix instances. Params: {"format": "yaml"|"xml"|"json", "options": {"hosts": ["id"], "templates": ["id"], "host_groups": ["id"], ...}}. Option keys: host_groups, hosts, images, maps, mediaTypes, template_groups, templates, and on Zabbix 8.0+ also dashboards and global_regexes.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYesExport parameters. Required keys: 'format' ('yaml', 'xml', or 'json') and 'options' (object specifying which entities to export by type and ID, e.g. {"hosts": ["10084"], "templates": ["10001"]}).
serverNoTarget Zabbix server. Available: default. Defaults to 'default' if omitted.
raw_jsonNoStrips the security disclaimer preamble from the response so it is pure JSON. Default: false. Requires the bearer token to have 'allow_raw_json' explicitly enabled by an operator in the admin portal - tokens without that policy receive a PolicyError instead. WARNING: setting true bypasses the prompt-injection mitigation marker that wraps untrusted Zabbix data (host names, item descriptions, problem text). LLM clients (Claude, GPT, Cursor, ...) should leave this false; only programmatic non-LLM consumers (Python scripts, n8n workflows that json.loads the result) should set true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.42.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "configuration_exportOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv1.41.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without description help. The description adds useful version-gating behavior (dashboards and global_regexes only on Zabbix 8.0+), but says nothing about output shape, size limits, or whether content is returned inline versus written to a file. It does not contradict the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose sentence is front-loaded and efficient, but the inline params/JSON block largely restates what the input schema already documents, consuming space without adding proportional value. It is readable but not tight.

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 read-only export tool with no output schema, the definition should clarify what the caller receives (serialized config payload, size considerations, format of the response wrapper). Annotations cover safety, but the return-side behavior and the interaction with raw_json are left to the schema's parameter description.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description genuinely extends the schema: the schema only gives an 'e.g.' sample of option keys, while the description enumerates the full accepted set (host_groups, hosts, images, maps, mediaTypes, template_groups, templates) and flags version-dependent keys. That is meaning an agent could not recover from the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Export Zabbix configuration') and names the supported serialization formats (YAML, XML, JSON), which is enough to tell it apart from read-oriented siblings like host_get or template_get. It does not explicitly contrast itself with configuration_importcompare, but the read-only export intent is unambiguous.

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?

'Use this to back up or transfer hosts, templates, and other objects between Zabbix instances' gives a clear usage context rather than leaving it implied. There are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives (e.g., when to prefer configuration_importcompare), so it falls short of a 5.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools