Skip to main content
Glama
mhajder

librenms-mcp

by mhajder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Alert Templates List

alert_templates_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all alert templates defined in LibreNMS, with optional limit and offset for paginated results.

Instructions

List all alert templates from LibreNMS.

Returns: dict: The JSON response from the API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return
offsetNoNumber of results to skip (offset) for pagination

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.10.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 100,
+  "description": "Maximum number of results to return",
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Number of results to skip (offset) for pagination",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv1.9.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds little beyond that, and it does not mention pagination behavior or the fact that 'all' may be limited by limit/offset.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The 'Returns: dict' line adds minor value but is mostly redundant given the output schema exists.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with full parameter documentation, an output schema, and safe-operation annotations, the description is mostly sufficient. A brief note about pagination would make it fully complete, but nothing critical is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so limit and offset are already fully documented. The description does not add any additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('alert templates') with a clear source ('LibreNMS'). It distinguishes itself from single-item tools like alert_template_get, though it doesn't explicitly name any sibling.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as alert_template_get or alert_rules_list. The only usage signal is the tool's name and the phrase 'List all,' which implies enumeration but offers no exclusions or alternative routing.

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