automations_list_scenesRetrieves all scenes in Home Assistant, returning their entity IDs and friendly names. Use to discover available scenes for automation or control.
List all scenes.
Reads ha.get_states() and keeps entries whose entity_id starts with
'scene.'.
Returns: list[dict] {"entity_id", "friendly_name"} per scene.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the implementation (reads ha.get_states() and filters by the 'scene.' entity_id prefix), telling the agent where the data comes from and why the result set is what it is.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the data source, then the return shape. No filler or repetition.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values did not need spelling out, yet the description still names the fields. With annotations covering safety and a zero-parameter schema, nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries nothing to explain; the baseline for a no-param tool is 4. The description adds nothing about parameters because there is nothing to add.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('List all scenes') and even names the underlying data source and filter ('ha.get_states()' entries whose entity_id starts with 'scene.'), which unambiguously separates it from siblings like automations_list_scripts or automations_list_automations.
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?
Usage is implied by the name and the description — an agent can infer this is the read tool for the scenes collection — but there is no explicit statement of when to use it versus alternatives such as automations_get_scene_config or ws_get_states, and no prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.