Zabbix MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

graphitem_get

Read-only

Retrieve read-only graph items from Zabbix to view individual data series, linked items, colors, draw styles, sort order, and Y-axis side; filter by graph or item IDs.

Instructions

Retrieve graph items (read-only). Graph items are the individual data series within a graph. Each graph item links a Zabbix item to a graph, specifying color, draw style, sort order, and Y-axis side.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results to return.
`output`	No	Properties of the graphitem object to return. Pass 'extend' for all, 'count' for the number of matches only, or a comma-separated list of property names. Default when omitted: gitemid, graphid, itemid, color. Properties: calc_fnc, color, drawtype, gitemid, graphid, itemid, sortorder, type, yaxisside.
`server`	No	Target Zabbix server. Available: default. Defaults to 'default' if omitted.
`itemids`	No	Return only graph items that reference the given items.
`graphids`	No	Return only graph items that belong to the given graphs.
`raw_json`	No	Strips 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.
`sortfield`	No	Sort by one or more of: gitemid (comma-separated for several; pair with 'sortorder'). No other property is sortable.
`sortorder`	No	Sort order: 'ASC' (ascending) or 'DESC' (descending).
`countOutput`	No	Return the count of matching results instead of the actual data.
`extra_params`	No	Other native graphitem.get parameters, merged into the request as-is. Parameters: type. Sub-object selects (value 'extend', 'count' or a list of property names): selectGraphs. Any other key is refused here, because Zabbix would silently ignore it. For a parameter you are sure exists on your release but is not listed, use zabbix_raw_api_call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.41.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's '(read-only)' adds nothing beyond structured data. It does contribute domain context (what a graph item represents), but says nothing about pagination behavior with limit, how raw_json/policy errors behave, or result shape – all of which live in the schema, not the description.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and with zero filler. The '(read-only)' parenthetical is mildly redundant against the readOnlyHint annotation, which keeps it just short of perfect.

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 zero-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description supplies the conceptual framing an agent needs to know what it is fetching. It stops short of explaining filter combination semantics (graphids vs itemids), but those are documented in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100% and all ten parameters carry rich inline documentation (output, sortfield, raw_json policy caveats, extra_params), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (retrieve graph items) and then defines the resource precisely: 'the individual data series within a graph', listing the attributes it carries (color, draw style, sort order, Y-axis side). This disambiguates it from the adjacent graph_get and item_get siblings without naming them.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing explains when an agent should call graphitem_get rather than graph_get or item_get, nor any precondition. The purpose statement only implies usage, and no exclusions or alternatives are offered.

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

Deploy Server