Skip to main content
Glama
sachdev27

OpManager MCP Server

by sachdev27

getInterfaceGraphs

Retrieve interface performance graphs from OpManager for network devices, supporting customizable time periods and graph types like traffic, utilization, and errors.

Instructions

getInterfaceGraphs

Category: Manage and query network devices

Key parameters:

  • interfaceName*: Name of the interface - Managed Entity name as seen in the U

  • graphName: Name of the interface graph [Example: totalPackets|traffic|u

  • isFluidic: Set as 'true' by default (for internal purpose)

  • period: Period for which the interface graph is required. [Example:

  • startDate: From Date. This parameter is applicable only if 'custom' tim

Input Schema

TableJSON 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
periodNoPeriod for which the interface graph is required. [Example: twelvehours(16),Today(6),twfourhours(3),Yesterday(7),thisweek(8),Last_7_Days(4),lastweek(9),thismonth(10),Last_30_Days(5),Last_Month(11),custom(23)]
endDateNoTo Date. This parameter is applicable only if 'custom' time is opted in period param value
graphNameNoName of the interface graph [Example: totalPackets|traffic|utilization|errors|discardRate|packets|errorRate]
isFluidicNoSet as 'true' by default (for internal purpose)
startDateNoFrom Date. This parameter is applicable only if 'custom' time is opted in period param value
interfaceNameYesName of the interface - Managed Entity name as seen in the URL of interface snapshot page OR 'interfaceName' property value in the listInterfaces API response
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any side effects. The truncated text omits crucial behavioral context beyond parameter listings.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is truncated and includes a redundant repetition of the tool name. The listing of key parameters is not well-structured; it seems cut off mid-sentence. It is not efficiently front-loaded and contains filler content.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, error conditions, and prerequisites. It fails to explain what happens when parameters are omitted or how to interpret results.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters well. The description repeats some parameter info (e.g., isFluidic) without adding new meaning. Per rubric, baseline of 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high and description adds little extra value.

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 includes 'Category: Manage and query network devices' and lists key parameters, making it clear that this tool retrieves interface graph data. However, it does not fully differentiate from siblings like getInterfaces or getInterfaceSummary, which might cause confusion. The truncated text reduces clarity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getInterfaceSummary or getIntfAtAGlanceReportDetails. The description only lists parameters without contextual instructions, leaving the agent without criteria for selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sachdev27/opmanager-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server