PC-Fixer MCP Server

pc_fixer_check_system

Checks physical hardware health, disk partition space, WSL2 VHDX growth, high-memory processes, and dev port conflicts to diagnose system issues.

Instructions

Check physical hardware health, disk partitions space, WSL2 vhdx growth, high-memory consumer processes, and active developer port conflicts (3000, 5000, 8000, etc.).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "pc_fixer_check_system"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ports`	No	Optional list of TCP port numbers to check for conflicts (e.g. [3000, 5000, 8000, 8080])

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the tool is read-only, whether probing hardware/WSL2 vhdx requires elevated privileges, how long the broad sweep takes, or whether any detected problems are merely reported rather than acted on (contrast pc_fixer_auto_heal).

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

Conciseness4/5

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

One dense sentence that front-loads the verb and then lists the inspection targets, with zero filler. The five-item enumeration is slightly list-like but each item earns its place by scoping what gets checked.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a zero-required-parameter inspection tool with no output schema, the definition covers what is inspected but not what comes back (structured findings? plain text report? exit status?) nor whether running it is side-effect free. Those gaps matter for an agent deciding whether to invoke it as a first diagnostic step.

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% and the single optional `ports` parameter is fully documented in the schema, so baseline 3 applies. The description only adds a hint of the default port set ("3000, 5000, 8000, etc."), which is mildly useful but not substantive syntax or format guidance.

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 gives a specific verb ("Check") and enumerates five concrete domains: hardware health, disk partition space, WSL2 vhdx growth, memory-heavy processes, and developer port conflicts. That is far more specific than a name restatement. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling pc_fixer_diagnose, whose purpose plausibly overlaps with a broad system check.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no routing away from siblings such as pc_fixer_diagnose or pc_fixer_kill_port_process even though port-conflict detection clearly overlaps with the latter. Usage is only implied by the phrase "Check ... health."

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

Deploy Server