Retrieve the complete list of Victron devices connected to the Venus OS server. Use this inventory to locate battery, PV, grid, and inverter data sources for monitoring and control.
List all Victron devices visible to the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are available, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It only states the action without mentioning that the operation is read-only, how the returned list is structured, or whether it should be used to obtain device IDs for sibling get_* tools. This goes beyond what the schema covers but still leaves key behavioral traits undisclosed.
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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'List' and contains no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it appropriately concise and well-structured for such a simple tool.
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?
Given that the tool has zero parameters and an output schema exists separately, the description is nearly complete. It would benefit from a brief note on use with sibling tools or clarification of 'visible to the server,' but these are minor gaps for a straightforward list operation.
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?
The input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The description correctly implies that no arguments are required. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and no additional parameter documentation is needed.
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 states a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('all Victron devices visible to the server'). It distinguishes itself from sibling get_* tools, which retrieve specific metrics, and from set_* tools that modify state. No ambiguity or tautology exists.
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 does not explicitly say when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions. The use case is implied by the nature of listing all devices, and the sibling tools are clearly per-device queries, so an agent can infer it is for discovery/enumeration. However, no explicit routing guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.