Skip to main content
Glama
xlbbb-cn

remote-ssh-server

by xlbbb-cn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

host_update

Update fields on an existing SSH host using its uid from host_list; omit fields to keep current values or clear credentials when changing auth method.

Instructions

Update fields on an existing host. Call host_list first — it returns the uid of every host, and that value is what host_id expects. Omit a credential field to keep the current value. Supply an empty string to clear it (only valid if you also flip the auth method).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
host_idYesIdentifier of an existing host: the exact `uid` value returned by `host_list`. Call `host_list` first and pass that value unchanged.
ssh_portNoNew SSH port (1-65535). Omit to keep the current value.
is_enableNoEnable or disable the host. Omit to keep the current value.
ip_addressNoNew IP address or hostname. Omit to keep the current value.
system_nameNoNew human-readable name. Omit to keep the current value.
ssh_passwordNoNew plaintext password. Omit to keep current value.
ssh_usernameNoNew SSH username. Omit to keep the current value.
ssh_auth_methodNoNew auth method ('password' or 'pubkey'). Omit to keep the current value.
ssh_private_keyNoNew plaintext private key. Omit to keep current value.
ssh_private_key_passphraseNoNew passphrase for the private key. Omit to keep current value.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully explains partial update semantics for credentials and the special rule that clearing a value requires flipping the auth method. It does not mention permissions, error behavior, or whether updates are reversible.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the prerequisite and credential semantics. No wasted text.

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?

For a 10-parameter mutation tool with complete schema descriptions but no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential invocation semantics. It does not describe response shape, permission requirements, or side effects beyond credential clearing.

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%, so the schema already documents parameters thoroughly. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by explaining host_id should be the uid from host_list and by clarifying empty-string clearing only when auth method changes.

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: updating fields on an existing host. It clearly distinguishes this from creation/deletion siblings by emphasizing existing host and field-level updates, and host_id is explicitly tied to host_list's uid.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a clear prerequisite to call host_list first and explains credential omission/clearing behavior. It does not explicitly contrast with host_create or state when not to use this tool, but the update context is clear.

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