Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zscaler/zscaler-mcp-serverWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/commands/zscaler/zscaler-mcp-server/app-health)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/zscaler/zscaler-mcp-server/app-health"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/zscaler/zscaler-mcp-server/app-health/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/zscaler/zscaler-mcp-server/app-health"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/zscaler/zscaler-mcp-server/app-health.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00016 | $0.00674 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00270 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00135 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00067 |
Grade A, and why
app-health scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze Application Health
Analyze health for: $ARGUMENTS
Step 1: Parse Input
Extract:
- Application name (optional -- analyze all monitored apps if not provided)
- Time window in hours (default: 2)
Step 2: List Monitored Applications
zdx_list_applications()
```text
## Step 3: Get Scores for Each Application
For each application (or the specified one):
```text
zdx_get_application(app_id="<app_id>", since=<hours>)
zdx_get_application_score_trend(app_id="<app_id>", since=<hours>)
```text
## Step 4: Investigate Degraded Applications
For any application with score < 66:
```text
zdx_get_application_metric(app_id="<app_id>", metric_name="dns_time", since=<hours>)
zdx_get_application_metric(app_id="<app_id>", metric_name="availability", since=<hours>)
```text
Identify the metric causing degradation.
## Step 5: Check Most Impacted Users
```text
zdx_list_devices(app_id="<app_id>")
```text
## Step 6: Present Report
**ALWAYS present data in HTML tables** using `<table>`, `<thead>`, `<tbody>`, `<tr>`, `<th>`, `<td>` tags with inline styling. Use color-coded rows: green (score 66-100), yellow (score 34-65), red (score 0-33).
Include:
1. **Application health overview table** (app name, score, status, PFT, DNS, availability, impacted users, bottleneck)
2. **Detailed analysis** for each degraded/poor application explaining what the bottleneck metric indicates
3. **Root cause** per degraded app (DNS resolver, server-side, CDN, ISP, etc.)
4. **Next steps / resolution** prioritized by user impact count:
- Critical apps: immediate investigation, check service health, engage vendor
- Degraded apps: monitor trend, investigate bottleneck metric, check ISP paths
- Healthy apps: no action, note any borderline (66-70) for proactive monitoring
## Step 7: Generate Downloadable Artifacts — MANDATORY
**You MUST create BOTH files. Do NOT skip the HTML page.**
1. **Word document** (`application_health_report_<date>.docx`): Executive summary, application health table, per-app deep dive for degraded apps, root cause analysis, user impact breakdown, prioritized remediation actions.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2mo ago First seen · 74 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 225f9e987c67
app-health is a command published in the GitHub repository zscaler/zscaler-mcp-server (55 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 674 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
app-health compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| app-healthzscaler/zscaler-mcp-server | Command | 55 | 10d ago | MIT | A | 16 | Claude Code |
| review-epo-claimsRobThePCGuy/Claude-Patent-Creator | Command | 209 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 22 | Claude Code |
| react-nativegetsentry/toolkit | Command | 957 | yesterday | none | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |