Skip to main content
Glama
zb-ss

Servonaut

by zb-ss
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

fleet_health_snapshot

Triage all managed SSH servers in one table: view load, CPU count, memory usage, php-fpm pool saturation, and listening web stack to spot unhealthy hosts without manual SSH checks.

Instructions

Triage the whole fleet in one table via SSH fan-out: load, CPU count, memory %, php-fpm pool saturation (active/max_children) and listening web stack across all managed instances. Surfaces the sick box without SSH'ing into each by hand. Unreachable hosts are listed separately. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regionNoOptional region filter.
accountNoOnly this account's servers: an account label, or 'custom' for the custom servers.
timeoutNoPer-host SSH timeout in seconds (5–60, default 15).
running_onlyNoProbe only running instances (default true).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.28.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / account
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only this account's servers: an account label, or 'custom' for the custom servers.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv2.24.0
  3. Removedv2.23.8
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it asserts 'Read-only', discloses the fan-out nature (implicitly many hosts, slow, timeout-governed), and documents failure behavior ('Unreachable hosts are listed separately'). It omits auth/credential requirements and any cost or rate-limit caveat for large fleets.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action and output shape, with no filler. The 'Surfaces the sick box...' sentence is justification rather than instruction, which slightly dilutes density but still earns its place as rationale for the fan-out design.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully previews the return shape (one table; load, CPU count, memory %, php-fpm pool saturation, listening web stack; unreachable hosts separated), which is what an agent needs to interpret results. It leaves the exact column format and large-fleet latency unstated.

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% and all four parameters are self-documenting (region filter, account, timeout range, running_only default), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already supplies.

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?

Specific verb+resource+scope: 'Triage the whole fleet in one table via SSH fan-out' plus an enumerated set of returned columns. It is clearly distinguishable from single-host siblings like get_server_info, check_status, and get_server_memory, and it also states the mechanism (SSH fan-out).

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?

Gives a clear usage context ('Triage the whole fleet', 'surfaces the sick box without SSH'ing into each by hand'), which tells the agent this is the bulk, first-pass diagnostic rather than a per-host deep dive. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives (get_server_memory, run_command) or exclusions, so it is not a 5.

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