Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Itential MCP Server

Itential MCP Server

Official
by itential
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Run Command

run_command
Destructive

Execute a command against multiple devices simultaneously to automate network operations and speed up troubleshooting.

Instructions

Run a single command against multiple devices.

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": {
      "cmd": "<cmd>",
      "devices": "<devices>"
    },
    "name": "run_command"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cmdYesThe command to run on the devices
devicesYesThe list of devices to run the command on

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultsYesList of command execution results for each device

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description offers no behavioral context beyond the annotations. While annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the description does not add expected execution behavior, side effects, or safety warnings, which would be valuable for a command execution tool.

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 one concise sentence with no redundant words, and each word adds meaning.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a potentially destructive tool with an output schema and no further guidance, the description is too sparse. It lacks guidance on how results are returned, whether execution is synchronous, or how device selection works, and given destructiveHint, a warning would be appropriate.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a clear description. The tool description adds minimal value by clarifying the 'single command' versus multiple devices, but this is already inferable from the schema.

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 identifies the action ('run a single command') and target ('multiple devices'), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tool 'run_command_template', so it falls short of a 5.

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 'run_command_template' or 'run_action'. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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