list_ports
List all active listening ports and their processes for network diagnostics and service identification.
Instructions
List all active listening ports and their processes.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
List all active listening ports and their processes for network diagnostics and service identification.
List all active listening ports and their processes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description conveys a read-only listing operation without side effects, but lacks details on potential restrictions (e.g., permissions) or return format; no annotations provided.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with no extraneous text; efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Sufficient for a simple list operation with no parameters; could mention expected output format but not necessary given tool simplicity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by clarifying the tool's purpose beyond the empty schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states 'List all active listening ports and their processes' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like kill_port_process that perform different actions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives; usage is implied but not contrasted with siblings such as check_connectivity or process_explorer.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lchampz/mcp-heimdall'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server