net-mcp

Local Routes

local_routes

Displays the current local routing table, including default gateway, connected networks, and static routes, for network diagnostics.

Instructions

Show the local routing table.

Displays all routes including default gateway, connected networks, and static routes. Uses netstat -rn on macOS, ip route on Linux, route print on Windows. Does not require admin privileges.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	Additional context about the result
`error`	No	Why the tool could not produce a result: input validation failure, tool disabled by configuration, binary not installed, or no service answered. Empty when the command executed.
`stderr`	Yes	Standard error of the command, or the failure message when the command did not run
`stdout`	Yes	Standard output of the command (curl output is capped at 10,000 characters)
`command`	Yes	The exact command line that was executed, or the tool name if the command never ran
`success`	Yes	True when the command ran and exited with status 0
`platform`	Yes	Operating system the command ran on (Darwin, Linux or Windows)
`returncode`	Yes	Process exit status. 0 = success; 2 = input rejected before running; 124 = timed out; 126 = disabled by config or permission denied; 127 = binary not found

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds valuable context beyond the schema: the tool uses platform-specific commands (netstat -rn, ip route, route print) and explicitly states it does not require admin privileges. This gives agents enough behavioral grounding for a read-only local diagnostic.

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?

The description is three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds useful scope and implementation details, with each sentence contributing necessary information for correct invocation.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a no-argument tool, this is complete: it states what is displayed, which platforms are supported, which underlying commands are used, and the privilege requirement. The presence of an output schema covers the return shape, so no additional output explanation is needed.

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 has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable; the baseline of 4 is appropriate. The description adds no parameter details because there are none to document, and the schema already provides complete coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Show the local routing table' and enumerates the exact content (default gateway, connected networks, static routes). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like local_interfaces, local_arp, or local_netstat_stats.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context: use this tool when the local routing table is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the phrase 'local routing table' and the enumerated route types make the intended use unambiguous.

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