Skip to main content
Glama
markuskreitzer

PicoScope MCP Server

list_devices

Discover and identify all connected PicoScope oscilloscopes to manage devices for signal acquisition and analysis.

Instructions

List all connected PicoScope devices.

Returns: Dictionary containing list of discovered devices with their info.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'list_devices' tool. It uses device_manager.discover_devices() to find connected PicoScope devices and returns a dictionary with status, device list, and count, handling exceptions gracefully.
    @mcp.tool()
    def list_devices() -> dict[str, Any]:
        """List all connected PicoScope devices.
    
        Returns:
            Dictionary containing list of discovered devices with their info.
        """
        try:
            devices = device_manager.discover_devices()
            return {
                "status": "success",
                "devices": devices,
                "count": len(devices),
            }
        except Exception as e:
            return {
                "status": "error",
                "error": str(e),
                "devices": [],
                "count": 0,
            }
  • Top-level registration call that invokes register_discovery_tools(mcp), which defines and registers the list_devices tool using the @mcp.tool() decorator.
    register_discovery_tools(mcp)
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns a dictionary with device info, which is helpful, but lacks details on critical behaviors: it doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation (implied by 'List' but not explicit), whether it performs network discovery or just lists already-connected devices, potential errors (e.g., no devices found), or performance considerations. The description adds some value but leaves significant gaps.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the purpose clearly, and the second sentence provides return value information. Both sentences earn their place by adding essential details. It could be slightly improved by front-loading the return info or combining sentences, but it's efficient with minimal waste.

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 low complexity (0 parameters, simple list operation) and the presence of an output schema (which covers return values), the description is reasonably complete. It states what the tool does and the return format. However, it could be more complete by addressing behavioral aspects like error handling or discovery mechanism, especially since no annotations are provided to fill those gaps.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly doesn't discuss parameters, which is appropriate. It earns a baseline 4 because it doesn't add unnecessary param info, but loses a point as it doesn't explicitly note the lack of parameters, which could help the agent understand it's a simple, parameterless query.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List all connected PicoScope devices.' It specifies the verb ('List') and resource ('connected PicoScope devices'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_device_info' or 'connect_device', which could provide similar device-related information.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether devices must be connected first), compare it to siblings like 'get_device_info' (which might retrieve info for a specific device), or specify scenarios where listing all devices is preferred over other operations. This lack of context leaves the agent without usage direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/markuskreitzer/picoscope_mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server