Skip to main content
Glama
vmware-skills

VMware-Monitor

by vmware-skills
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

cross_vcenter_attention

Read-onlyIdempotent

Aggregate and rank cluster-health issues across every configured vCenter into one prioritized list, tagged by source vCenter. Unreachable targets are reported separately with reasons while remaining issues still aggregate.

Instructions

[READ] "What needs attention now?" across EVERY configured vCenter — one list.

Start here when the estate has more than one vCenter. Rolls every configured target's cluster-health summary into one globally ranked top_issues list (worst first, each tagged with its vcenter) plus a per-target rollup. Use this instead of calling cluster_health_summary once per target and merging yourself. Returns a rollup, not the list envelope; lead with top_issues.

Degrades gracefully: an unreachable target is listed under unreachable with a reason and the rest still aggregate. Point-in-time — no trending. Then drill in with vm_investigation_bundle, host_investigation_bundle or datastore_investigation_bundle against the vcenter the issue names.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
top_nNoCap the merged top_issues list (default 10); ``issues_total`` is the pre-cap count.
cluster_filterNoCase-insensitive cluster substring applied to every target (None = all clusters).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.9.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / cluster_filter / description
      Added value: +"Case-insensitive cluster substring applied to every target (None = all clusters)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / top_n / description
      Added value: +"Cap the merged top_issues list (default 10); ``issues_total`` is the pre-cap count."
  2. Addedv1.7.6

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses graceful degradation for unreachable targets, states that results are point-in-time with no trending, and explains that the return value is a rollup rather than the list envelope. This gives the agent useful behavioral expectations not captured in annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and each sentence adds distinct value: scope, aggregation model, alternative, return shape, failure handling, point-in-time semantics, and next-step guidance. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains the key return concepts: globally ranked top_issues, per-target rollup, unreachable section with reasons, and vcenter tagging. Combined with the parameter schema and annotations, the agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly and interpret results.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both top_n and cluster_filter, including defaults and behavior. The tool description does not add much specific parameter-level detail, but that is acceptable because schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a clear interrogative framing ('What needs attention now?') tied to a specific resource ('every configured vCenter') and delivers one aggregated, globally ranked list. It explicitly contrasts itself with cluster_health_summary and the investigation bundles, making the tool unmistakable.

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?

It explicitly says to 'Start here when the estate has more than one vCenter' and tells the agent to use this 'instead of calling cluster_health_summary once per target and merging yourself.' It also names the drill-in successors for follow-up, leaving no ambiguity about when and with what to use this tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools