Skip to main content
Glama
vmware-skills

VMware-Monitor

by vmware-skills
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_host_sensors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve hardware sensor readings (temperature, voltage, fan) for all vCenter/ESXi hosts, including sensor status and hosts lacking sensors, to identify physical hardware issues before they escalate.

Instructions

[READ] Get hardware sensor status (temperature, voltage, fan, ...) for all hosts.

Returns the list envelope with a real total; each row has host, sensor_name, type, reading, unit and status (green/yellow/red). No rows for a host is not "hardware is fine": every connected host that reports no sensors is listed in hosts_without_sensors with cim_server_running / cim_server_policy (the CIM Server, sfcbd-watchdog, supplies the sensors; null = not read), and sensors_note says what that means — quote it.

Use this for physical hardware only — for CPU/memory load use host_performance, and follow up on a red sensor with host_investigation_bundle to see the alarms and events around that host.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax sensor rows to return (None = all).
targetNovCenter/ESXi target from config (default if omitted).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.9.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Max sensor rows to return (None = all)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Added value: +"vCenter/ESXi target from config (default if omitted)."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "items": {
-        "additionalProperties": true,
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "array"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "get_host_sensorsOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Addedv1.5.38

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar is met by adding meaningful context. The description adds crucial behavior beyond annotations: no rows does not mean healthy; hosts without sensors appear in hosts_without_sensors with cim_server_running/cim_server_policy, and sensors_note must be quoted. This is exactly the kind of subtle behavior an agent needs to avoid misinterpreting results.

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 dense but every sentence carries essential information: the scope, the return envelope, the non-obvious no-sensors semantics, the quote instruction, and explicit sibling routing. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then adds necessary detail without filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the envelope, field list, hosts_without_sensors structure, and the CIM server dependency. It also covers routing to related tools, leaving little ambiguity for an agent deciding to call and interpret this tool correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents limit and target clearly. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable but does not elevate the score above the baseline.

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: 'Get hardware sensor status (temperature, voltage, fan, ...) for all hosts.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by emphasizing physical hardware sensors and explicitly contrasting with host_performance for CPU/memory load and host_investigation_bundle for red-sensor follow-up.

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?

Usage guidance is explicit: 'Use this for physical hardware only — for CPU/memory load use host_performance, and follow up on a red sensor with host_investigation_bundle.' This gives the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use directions with named alternatives.

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