Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
esxi-readonly-mcp

esxi-readonly-mcp

by nicolasboattini
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

snapshots

Lists ESXi VM point-in-time copies with date, age, and approximate size, flagging those exceeding the configured alert threshold.

Instructions

Todos los snapshots con fecha, antiguedad, tamano aproximado y marca de los que superan dias_alerta.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "snapshots"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dias_alertaNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the returned content (date, age, approximate size, alert flag), which is genuinely useful, but it never states that this is a read-only listing, whether permissions are required, or how pagination/volume is handled.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the resource and then the returned fields, with zero redundant or filler text. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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 one-parameter listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers both the returned shape and the parameter's role. It is essentially complete, only missing explicit read-only/permission context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% (the single parameter has only a default of 3 and no description), so the description must compensate. It does: dias_alerta is explained as the threshold above which a snapshot is marked, giving the parameter concrete meaning beyond the bare integer.

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 resource (snapshots) and enumerates the fields it returns: date, age, approximate size, and an alert mark. That is far more than a tautology, so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not need sibling differentiation since no other sibling tool deals with snapshots.

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?

Usage is only implied: the tool exists to inventory snapshots and flag the ones older than dias_alerta. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisite, and no named alternative, but the alert-mark semantics hint at the diagnostic context.

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