Retrieve router model, firmware version, uptime, and system summary for quick device assessment.
Get router model, firmware version, uptime and system summary.
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": "get_system_info"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lists the data fields but does not state that the operation is read-only, has no side effects, or any access requirements. The phrase 'system summary' is vague and lacks detail on what else might be returned.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb 'Get' and lists the key resources. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers the main items adequately. However, 'system summary' is somewhat ambiguous and could benefit from more specificity, but it is still sufficient for the tool's simplicity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are no parameters, so the description naturally adds no param information. Schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). According to guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description precisely states what the tool retrieves: router model, firmware version, uptime, and system summary. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_interfaces and get_wan_status by focusing on system-level information.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for retrieving system information but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.