Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@nexalware/mcp

@nexalware/mcp

Official
by nexalware
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_latest_telemetry

Retrieve a given device's present state and the last recorded value for every telemetry metric, letting operators verify reported readings before issuing commands.

Instructions

Read a device's current state plus the most recent reading per telemetry metric.

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": {
      "deviceId": "<deviceId>"
    },
    "name": "get_latest_telemetry"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deviceIdYesThe device's public id, e.g. dev_a1b2c3.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.5

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return scope (current state plus latest reading per metric), but omits auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, and whether historical data is excluded. Read-only nature is only implied by 'Read'.

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 is front-loaded and contains no filler. Every word contributes to the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no annotations or output schema, the description states what is returned but leaves ambiguity versus sibling telemetry tools and lacks behavioral constraints. It is adequate but incomplete for reliable selection.

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?

There is one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents deviceId. The description adds no syntax or semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('device's current state plus the most recent reading per telemetry metric'). It does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like get_device_telemetry or get_sub_device_telemetry; 'latest' implies recency but no contrast is drawn.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, and no exclusions. The description implies a snapshot use case but does not tell the agent when to choose this over get_device_telemetry.

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