frappe_ping
Verify connectivity to your Frappe/ERPNext site to confirm the server is online and accessible.
Instructions
Check connectivity to the configured Frappe/ERPNext site.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Verify connectivity to your Frappe/ERPNext site to confirm the server is online and accessible.
Check connectivity to the configured Frappe/ERPNext site.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description implies a safe, read-only operation but lacks details on response format, authentication needs, or any side effects. For a simple ping, basic transparency is acceptable.
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 front-loads the purpose with no wasted words.
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?
For a parameterless, no-output-schema tool, the description fully informs the agent of the tool's purpose.
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% (empty). Per guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4; description adds no unnecessary param info.
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 action ('Check connectivity') and target resource ('configured Frappe/ERPNext site'), distinguishing it from sibling CRUD tools.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, but sibling tool names (all document operations) imply this is for connectivity checks.
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/muthanii/frappe_mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server