Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Raidcom MCP

Raidcom MCP

by visubramaniam
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List raidcom recipes

raidcom_list_recipes
Read-onlyIdempotent

List ready-made storage provisioning recipes and search them by keyword. View detailed parameters and steps to quickly identify the right workflow for your task.

Instructions

Ready-made workflows: provision volumes to an FC, iSCSI or NVMe/TCP host, create or grow a pool, create a mainframe (3390) pool, extend or delete volumes, create a command device, reclaim zero pages, read-only inventory, copy groups. With no arguments lists them. With recipe, shows its parameters and steps. With query, ranks recipes by keyword. Use raidcom_build_recipe to turn one into a script.

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": "raidcom_list_recipes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoWords describing the task, e.g. "new ESXi host".
recipeNoRecipe ID to show in detail, e.g. provision-fc-volumes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.8

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail the annotations don't carry: the three calling modes and what each returns (a list, a parameter/step breakdown, or a keyword ranking). It doesn't mention listing size, pagination, or whether recipes are static or environment-dependent, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Mode-specific guidance is front-loaded after the recipe category list, and every sentence carries either scope or a calling rule. The opening category enumeration is long but directly aids selection; no filler sentences are present.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing what each mode returns qualitatively (list, parameter/step detail, ranked matches). Only gap is the exact shape of the no-argument listing, which is not spelled out, but for a read-only discovery tool that is a minor omission.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with examples already in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description earns a bump by explaining the effect of each parameter rather than just its name: `recipe` shows parameters and steps, `query` ranks recipes by keyword, and no parameters yields the full list.

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?

States a specific resource (ready-made raidcom recipes) and enumerates the workflow categories it covers (provisioning to FC/iSCSI/NVMe hosts, pool creation/growth, mainframe pools, volume extend/delete, command devices, zero-page reclaim, inventory, copy groups). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling by naming raidcom_build_recipe as the tool that turns a recipe into a script.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit dispatch rules for each call shape: 'With no arguments lists them', 'With `recipe`, shows its parameters and steps', 'With `query`, ranks recipes by keyword'. It also hands off to the correct sibling ('Use raidcom_build_recipe to turn one into a script'), so the agent knows both when to use this and what to use next.

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