Skip to main content
Glama
nucleusv

Linux MCP daemon

by nucleusv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

kernel/system-control

Read or write Linux kernel parameters at runtime through /proc/sys. Use it to tune sysctl settings like IP forwarding without reboot, with writes requiring root privileges.

Instructions

Reads or writes kernel parameters (sysctl equivalent) at runtime, natively via /proc/sys. Writes require privileged: true, and may be restricted per user (read-only, or only certain keys) by mcp-sudo.yaml.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyNoKernel parameter name, dotted (net.ipv4.ip_forward) or slash form (net/ipv4/conf/eth0.100/rp_filter). A directory (e.g. net.ipv4) reads its whole subtree.
valueNoValue to set for the parameter. If omitted, reads the parameter.
read_allNoIf true, reads all available parameters. Ignored if key is set.
privilegedNoRun as root - required for writes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that writes mutate state, require privileged=true, and can be restricted per user via mcp-sudo.yaml. It does not detail output/error behavior, but covers the main permission and safety context.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The action and mechanism are front-loaded, followed by the critical permission/restriction context. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Coupled with the fully-documented schema, the description covers the operation, runtime nature, privileged write requirement, and per-user restrictions. It lacks output/error details and persistence notes, but for this tool the coverage is nearly complete.

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?

The input schema already provides detailed descriptions for all 4 parameters, including dotted/slash forms, directory subtree reads, value-omitted reads, and read_all semantics. The description adds no new parameter-specific meaning beyond restating the privileged requirement.

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?

States a specific verb (reads/writes), a clear resource (kernel parameters, sysctl equivalent), and the mechanism (/proc/sys). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like system/os-release or network/connections.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Clearly conveys that it is for accessing kernel parameters at runtime, and that writes require privileged=true. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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