Skip to main content
Glama
mhajder

librenms-mcp

by mhajder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Services List

services_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List LibreNMS services with optional filters for state, type, limit, and offset to monitor network service health.

Instructions

List all services from LibreNMS with optional filters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return
stateNoFilter by state: 0=Ok, 1=Warning, 2=Critical
offsetNoNumber of results to skip (offset) for pagination
service_typeNoFilter by service type (SQL LIKE pattern)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 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"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / state / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "integer"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv1.9.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
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 the scope ('all services') but otherwise does not disclose additional behavioral details such as default pagination or filter behavior beyond what the schema already states.

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 that states the action, resource, and filtering capability with no wasted words. The essential information is front-loaded and immediately useful to an agent.

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 schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could add a note about pagination defaults or the relationship to 'services_for_device', but nothing essential is missing for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 the input schema already documents all four parameters and their meanings. The description only says 'optional filters' without elaborating, which is acceptable given the schema carries the parameter-level detail.

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 ('all services from LibreNMS'), making the core action unmistakable. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'services_for_device', but 'all services' strongly implies a global listing rather than a per-device one.

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 this is the tool for listing all services and optionally filtering them, which is reasonably clear. However, it does not explicitly address when to prefer it over alternatives like 'services_for_device' or when not to use it, leaving some routing to inference.

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