Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud-gov-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_cdss_get_cluster_status

Read-only

Retrieve health status of a CDSS cluster by instance number, checking broker, Zookeeper, and CMAK status per node to identify issues.

Instructions

Get health status of a CDSS cluster (broker, zookeeper, CMAK status per node)

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": {
      "serviceGroupInstanceNo": "<serviceGroupInstanceNo>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_cdss_get_cluster_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serviceGroupInstanceNoYesCluster instance number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's main value is adding context about what statuses are included (broker, zookeeper, CMAK per node). However, it does not disclose response format, potential lack of availability, or other behavioral nuances beyond the annotation.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and specifies key components, with no filler or redundant information.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description's mention of broker/zookeeper/CMAK status per node provides useful hints about the response. However, it could be more explicit about the response structure or whether a cluster-level status is also included.

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%, with serviceGroupInstanceNo described as 'Cluster instance number'. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema sufficiently documents the single parameter.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves health status for a CDSS cluster, specifying components (broker, zookeeper, CMAK) and per-node granularity. This uses a specific verb and resource, differentiating it from sibling tools like get_cluster_detail.

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 implies the tool is for checking health status, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it vs alternatives such as ncloud_cdss_get_cluster_detail or ncloud_cdss_get_monitoring. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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