Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
NVIDIA MCP

NVIDIA MCP

by yeominsoo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Check NVIDIA Setup

check_nvidia_setup

Verify that an NVIDIA API key is accessible and determine the base URLs and output directory used by the MCP server. Optionally test the key by calling the /models endpoint.

Instructions

Check whether the NVIDIA MCP can see an API key and which base URLs/output directory it will use.

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": "check_nvidia_setup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
probeNoWhen true, call /models to verify the key.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool checks for an API key and reveals URLs/output directory, but does not disclose if any state changes occur or if it requires network access. The behavior is simple but could be more explicit.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence conveys the tool's purpose efficiently without superfluous words. Perfect conciseness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional boolean parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It states what is checked, though it could mention that no output is returned or what 'sees an API key' means in practice.

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 coverage is 100% as the only parameter (probe) has a description. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool checks for API key presence and identifies base URLs and output directory. This is a distinct diagnostic purpose from sibling tools like chat_completion or generate_image, which are execution-oriented.

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?

The description implies usage for verifying configuration before running other tools, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with alternatives. The context is clear but lacks exclusion guidance.

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