Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-elasticache-ops

mcp-elasticache-ops

by ritojoao
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Memcached Cluster Stats

memcached_cluster_stats
Read-onlyIdempotent

Query every Memcached node with bounded concurrency to surface evictions, hit-ratio outliers, memory/item imbalance, disabled listeners, and connection pressure; dead nodes return partial results.

Instructions

Memcached fleet view over MEMCACHED_NODES: every node queried with bounded concurrency, only stats, stats slabs, stats items. Findings first: evictions, hit-ratio outliers, item/memory imbalance, listen_disabled_num, connections near maxconns, evicting slab classes. A dead node makes it partial.

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": "memcached_cluster_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: bounded concurrency across nodes, a restricted command set, the findings it prioritizes, and the important caveat that a dead node makes results partial. However, it does not say whether partial results are flagged in the output or how the agent should detect that condition.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short and front-loaded, leading with the scope before the detail. The phrasing is telegraphic and fragmentary ('Findings first:', 'only `stats`...'), which reads as note-like rather than polished, but no sentence is filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value structure need not be documented here. The description covers scope, method, prioritized findings, and the partial-result failure mode, which is nearly everything an agent needs for a zero-parameter read tool. The only gap is how the partial condition surfaces to the caller.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing options that do not exist in the empty schema.

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?

The description states a specific resource and scope: a fleet-wide view over MEMCACHED_NODES where every node is queried, plus the exact command surface used (`stats`, `stats slabs`, `stats items`). That scope word 'every node' implicitly separates it from the single-node memcached_stats sibling, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the cluster-wide choice when fleet health matters, but there is no explicit 'use this when / use memcached_stats instead when' routing. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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