ssh-mcp-pro

Detect Remote OS

os_detect

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify the operating system and environment of an active SSH session to guide subsequent commands and configurations.

Instructions

Detects operating system and environment information

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": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>"
    },
    "name": "os_detect"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sessionId`	Yes	SSH session ID

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`arch`	Yes
`init`	Yes
`shell`	Yes
`distro`	Yes
`tempDir`	No
`version`	Yes
`platform`	Yes
`defaultShell`	No
`packageManager`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.5Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds little beyond confirming it detects information. It does not contradict annotations, but it does not provide additional behavioral context (e.g., network sensitivity, permissions).

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?

Description is extremely concise: a single sentence that conveys the tool's purpose without any superfluous words. Every part of the description is meaningful.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description is sufficient. It clearly states the tool's function and does not require additional information about return values or edge cases.

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?

Parameter schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter (sessionId: 'SSH session ID'). The description does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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?

Description clearly states the tool detects operating system and environment information. The verb 'detects' and resource 'operating system and environment information' provide specific purpose, and no sibling tool overlaps with this function.

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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. While the purpose is clear, there is no guidance on context or exclusions, which is acceptable given its simplicity but not exemplary.

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