Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpManager MCP Server

OpManager MCP Server

by sachdev27
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

getDowntimeSchedule

Retrieve a downtime schedule by its scheduler name to view planned maintenance windows in OpManager.

Instructions

getDowntimeSchedule

Key parameters:

  • operation: Downtime scheduler name

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": {
      "host": "<host>",
      "apiKey": "<apiKey>"
    },
    "name": "getDowntimeSchedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hostYesOpManager host address (e.g., 'opmanager.example.com' or 'opmanager.example.com:8061'). Default port is 8061 (HTTPS).
apiKeyYesOpManager API key for authentication
operationNoDowntime scheduler name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or any other behavioral traits beyond the parameter hint.

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?

The description is concise but structurally minimal; however, it lacks essential information, making it under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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?

For a simple tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description should indicate what is returned (e.g., schedule details) and how to use the 'operation' parameter. It fails to provide this, making it incomplete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond repeating the operation parameter's purpose already in the schema. Other parameters (host, apiKey) are unmentioned.

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 only repeats the tool name and mentions the 'operation' parameter as 'Downtime scheduler name', without explicitly stating that the tool retrieves a specific downtime schedule. It is tautological and fails to differentiate from siblings like listDownTimeSchedules.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as listDownTimeSchedules or updateDowntimeSchedule. The agent has no context for appropriate invocation.

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