Displays detailed CPU, RAM, swap, and disk telemetry for a specified node or the connected node, helping agents inspect cluster node health and resource usage.
Show detailed CPU/RAM/swap/disk telemetry for a node (defaults to the connected node).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| node | No | Node hostname or UUID (defaults to current). | |
| context | No | Named login context from ~/.config/sylve/config.yaml. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the default-target behavior, saying nothing about permissions on remote nodes, output volume, or whether telemetry is sampled/live — modest added value given the low bar set by annotations.
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?
One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, no boilerplate or redundancy. Every clause (metric list, default target) earns its place.
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?
With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so at the level of metric families (CPU/RAM/swap/disk). For a two-optional-parameter read-only tool that is close to sufficient, though it omits whether the response is a snapshot vs. time series and how the `context` param interacts with discovery.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both `node` and `context` are already documented, and the description's "defaults to the connected node" restates the schema's own default note. Baseline 3 applies; no new semantics such as accepted hostname format or context precedence are introduced.
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?
States a clear verb + resource ("Show detailed CPU/RAM/swap/disk telemetry for a node") and names the exact metric families returned, so an agent knows this is a single-node telemetry read rather than a listing. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings like sylve_node_list or sylve_cluster_resources, which keeps it from a 5.
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?
The parenthetical "defaults to the connected node" implies the common no-arg usage, but there is no explicit statement of when to pick this over sylve_node_list or sylve_cluster_resources, nor any exclusions. Usage is inferable rather than guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.