Skip to main content
Glama
Fistacho

ha-nexus-agent

by Fistacho
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Save Lovelace dashboard config

dashboards_save_dashboard_config
DestructiveIdempotent

Overwrite a Lovelace dashboard's stored views and sections by sending a full config to Home Assistant, replacing the previous version without validation or backup.

Instructions

Replace the entire config of one storage-mode Lovelace dashboard.

Sends config as-is to lovelace/config/save, fully overwriting that dashboard's stored views/sections with no validation, backup, or undo — keep the previous config (e.g. from dashboards_get_dashboard_config) if you need to restore it.

Use when: writing back a dashboard object built or fetched in full. Not for: a single card or section change — use dashboards_add_card_to_section/dashboards_update_card_in_section/ dashboards_remove_card_from_section (sections views) or dashboards_add_card_to_view (masonry/panel views), which read-modify- write the config for you. Returns: {"status": "saved", "url_path": ...}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
configYesFull dashboard object with a 'views' list, as returned by dashboards_get_dashboard_config for a dashboard path — never the {view, source, path} excerpt it returns for a view path.
url_pathNoDashboard url_path to save, from dashboards_list_dashboards. Omit for the default dashboard.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.25.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / config / description
      Added value: +"Full dashboard object with a 'views' list, as returned by dashboards_get_dashboard_config for a dashboard path — never the {view, source, path} excerpt it returns for a view path."
    • addedInput schema / properties / url_path / description
      Added value: +"Dashboard url_path to save, from dashboards_list_dashboards. Omit for the default dashboard."
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds concrete consequences beyond them: no validation, no backup, no undo, and explicit guidance to retain the prior config from `dashboards_get_dashboard_config` for restoration. That is exactly the behavioral context a caller needs before a full overwrite.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded with the core action, then the overwrite warning, then the routing guidance, then the return shape. Every sentence earns its place; nothing is redundant padding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, nested-object write with an output schema, the description covers the overwrite semantics, the no-undo risk, the correct source for the payload, sibling alternatives, and even the return shape. An agent has everything needed to call it safely.

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%, so both `config` and `url_path` are already documented, including the warning about the view-path excerpt. The description reinforces that `config` is sent as-is but adds no new syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Replace the entire config of one storage-mode Lovelace dashboard.' It further distinguishes scope (storage-mode, full replacement) and names the sibling alternatives to use for granular edits, so an agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit 'Use when' and 'Not for' sections. It names the exact alternatives (`dashboards_add_card_to_section`, `dashboards_update_card_in_section`, `dashboards_remove_card_from_section`, `dashboards_add_card_to_view`) and the view types they apply to, leaving no inference to the agent.

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