Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unraid MCP

Unraid MCP

by lemanjo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Next Unraid notificationsOverview event

unraid_v4371_next_notifications_overview
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the next notification overview event from Unraid, returning one bounded payload before disconnecting. Provides a single snapshot of notifications for quick inspection.

Instructions

Wait for the next event from this fixed GraphQL subscription, return one bounded payload, then disconnect.

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": "unraid_v4371_next_notifications_overview"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: it is a one-shot, blocking wait, returns a bounded payload, and disconnects rather than streaming. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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?

A single sentence front-loads the key action ('Wait for the next event') and adds the essential behavioral constraints. Every phrase earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a no-parameter subscription the behavioral lifecycle is covered, but with no output schema the description does not explain what the notificationsOverview payload contains or what triggers it. An agent selecting among similarly named subscription tools gets only the title as semantic context.

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 has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces this with 'fixed', and there are no parameter semantics left undocumented.

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 gives a specific action—wait for the next event, return one payload, disconnect—and identifies the resource as a fixed GraphQL subscription, matching the notificationsOverview title. It is clear enough but does not differentiate this subscription from sibling next_* subscription tools such as next_notification_added or next_notifications_warnings_and_alerts.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that query_notifications or list_notifications could be used for current state, nor any condition for choosing to wait for an event instead.

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