get_system_infoRetrieve HestiaCP server system details, including OS, CPU, memory, and disk usage, by running the verified v-list-sys-info command.
Get HestiaCP system information. Executes verified command v-list-sys-info.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | json |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | Yes | ||
| data | No | ||
| error | No | ||
| command | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it 'Executes verified command v-list-sys-info', providing a small implementation detail, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as output size, latency, or permissions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no redundant words. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the implementation detail is kept brief, making it easy to parse quickly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and a rich annotation set, the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks any usage context or differentiation from sibling tools, and 'system information' remains vague without enumerating what data is returned.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the 'format' parameter at all. The schema itself defines the enum (json, plain) and default (json), so the parameter is understandable, but the description fails to add any meaning beyond that structured information.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get HestiaCP system information' and identifies the underlying command 'v-list-sys-info'. It distinguishes itself from similar siblings like get_system_config and list_system_services by focusing on general system information, though it doesn't explicitly name any alternatives.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions, exclusions, or related tools such as get_system_config or list_system_services, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.