Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
plesk-mcp

plesk-mcp

by rubcc95
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

project_info

project_info
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves project configuration information and reports a configuration error when none is loaded, so you can verify setup before Plesk project operations.

Instructions

No configuration is loaded. Returns the configuration error.

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": "project_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description does add one behavioral fact — that it returns a configuration error when no configuration is loaded — but omits what it returns on success, which is the behavior an agent actually needs to know.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Two short sentences with no padding, so length is not a problem. However, the structure is inverted: it leads with an error condition rather than the tool's function, and the most important fact (what it returns) never appears.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations explaining return values, the description carries full responsibility for describing the response, yet it only describes a failure case. For a zero-parameter informational tool that is a significant omission.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the empty input schema is fully self-explanatory. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description never states that the tool returns project information; instead it opens with a failure state ('No configuration is loaded') and says it 'Returns the configuration error.' An agent reading this cannot tell whether the tool reports project metadata or only surfaces an error, and nothing distinguishes it from the sibling 'doctor' diagnostic tool.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no precondition statement (e.g. 'call after selecting a project'), and no routing to alternatives such as 'doctor' or 'servers_list'. The only implicit hint is that the tool misbehaves when configuration is absent, which is not actionable selection guidance.

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