Skip to main content
Glama

health_check

Monitor HashPilot MCP server health and status to verify operational functionality and check version, tool availability, and optimization settings.

Instructions

Check HashPilot MCP server health and status. Returns version, tool count, and optimization level.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
verboseNoInclude detailed status

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the core logic of the 'health_check' tool. It returns a static health status object with server version, tool count, and optimization details.
    async function healthCheck(): Promise<{ success: boolean; data: any }> {
      return {
        success: true,
        data: {
          status: 'healthy',
          version: '0.2.0-optimized',
          toolCount: 31,
          optimization: 'MCP Best Practices Compliant + M3 Composite Integrations',
        },
      };
    }
  • The tool schema definition including name, description, and inputSchema for the 'health_check' tool.
      name: 'health_check',
      description: 'Check HashPilot MCP server health and status. Returns version, tool count, and optimization level.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object' as const,
        properties: {
          verbose: { type: 'boolean', description: 'Include detailed status' },
        },
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:561-563 (registration)
    The switch case registration that maps the 'health_check' tool name to its handler function execution.
    case 'health_check':
      result = await healthCheck();
      break;
  • src/index.ts:541-546 (registration)
    The request handler for listing tools, which includes the 'health_check' tool in the optimizedToolDefinitions array.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      // Return all optimized tools including M3 integrations
      return {
        tools: optimizedToolDefinitions,
      };
    });
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return values (version, tool count, optimization level) and mentions a parameter effect ('verbose' for detailed status), but lacks behavioral details like error handling, latency, or authentication requirements.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence and adds return details efficiently in the second. Every sentence provides essential information with zero waste, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete: it states the purpose, return values, and parameter effect. However, it lacks some behavioral context (e.g., error cases or performance expectations) that could enhance completeness.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that 'verbose' affects the output ('Include detailed status'), which clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's minimal description, justifying a score above 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Check') and resources ('HashPilot MCP server health and status'), and distinguishes it from all sibling tools which focus on accounts, contracts, tokens, etc., not server health monitoring.

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 for checking server status, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for debugging, monitoring, or initialization). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/justmert/hashpilot'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server