nornir-mcp-server

run_netmiko_command

Execute CLI commands concurrently on filtered network devices via Netmiko; optionally parse output into structured data using TextFSM.

Instructions

Run a show command concurrently on multiple hosts via Netmiko.

Args: command: The CLI command to execute (e.g., 'show version'). filter_criteria: Dictionary of key-value pairs to filter target hosts. If empty, runs on ALL hosts! use_textfsm: If True, attempts to parse output into structured data using ntc-templates.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "command": "<command>"
    },
    "name": "run_netmiko_command"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`command`	Yes
`use_textfsm`	No
`filter_criteria`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Discloses concurrency and filter_criteria behavior (runs on all hosts if empty). However, no annotations exist, and the description does not mention error handling, timeout, or read-only nature. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Concise with three focused lines (Args format). No wasted words. Front-loads purpose and clearly separates parameter descriptions.

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?

Given no annotations and output schema, the description covers parameters and key behaviors. Lacks return value details but output schema likely provides them. Reasonably complete for a moderate-complexity tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning for all 3 parameters: command (example), filter_criteria (filtering and default behavior), use_textfsm (parsing attempt). Fully compensates for schema gaps.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states 'Run a show command concurrently on multiple hosts via Netmiko' with specific verb, resource, and method. Distinguishes from siblings like run_netmiko_config and run_serial_command.

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?

Implies use for show commands, but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. The description notes filter_criteria behavior but lacks guidance on choosing this over run_netmiko_config or others.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server