Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
thruk-mcp

thruk-mcp

by k9fr4n
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

thruk_list_contacts

Retrieve configured contacts from Nagios/Naemon monitoring to manage notification targets and recipients.

Instructions

List configured Nagios/Naemon contacts (notification targets).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "thruk_list_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoSort order: a column name, optionally prefixed with '-' for descending (e.g. 'name', '-last_check'); comma-separate multiple keys. Defaults to 'name'.name
limitNo
offsetNo
columnsNoComma-separated columns to return. Omit for a curated default set tuned for this tool; pass '' (empty string) to return all available columns.
backendsNoComma-separated backend names (sites). Omit for all backends.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic function. It fails to disclose pagination (limit/offset from schema), read-only nature, or any authentication requirements, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 description is extremely concise (one sentence) but at the cost of missing critical context. It front-loads the purpose but is too brief to be fully helpful.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the output structure, how to use parameters, or any behavioral traits, leaving agents underinformed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds no information about the parameters beyond what the input schema provides. With 60% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not, leaving agents unaware of how to use 'sort', 'limit', 'offset', 'columns', or 'backends' effectively.

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 'list' and the resource 'configured Nagios/Naemon contacts (notification targets)', distinguishing it from the sibling 'thruk_get_contact' which gets a single contact.

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 listing contacts but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'thruk_get_contact' or other list tools, nor any 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