aivy-mcp

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_vendors

Discover supported inverter and battery brands, check deployment availability, and review connection and control requirements before linking a site.

Instructions

Every inverter / battery brand Aivy can connect, whether it is available on this deployment, what connecting one needs (connect: serial + NMI, a system id, or an OAuth sign-in at the vendor) and how much of it can be controlled. Use before connect_site.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_vendors"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.9.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the three things returned (availability on this deployment, connect requirements, controllability) and lists the connection methods (serial + NMI, system id, vendor OAuth). It never explicitly says the call is non-mutating/harmless, which is the only real gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with scope, then the sibling routing. Slightly dense with parenthetical detail and backticked `connect`, but every clause (brands, availability, requirements, control level) carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value formatting needn't be explained; the description still previews what the output contains. Combined with zero parameters and a stated prerequisite relationship to connect_site, it is effectively complete for this complexity.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly implies a single unfiltered enumeration with no inputs to supply.

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 description states a specific resource (every inverter/battery brand Aivy can connect) and enumerates exactly what the listing tells you: deployment availability, connection requirements, and control scope. It names the sibling it pairs with (connect_site), so an agent can distinguish it from generic listing tools like list_sites.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

"Use before connect_site" gives explicit ordering guidance and a clear trigger for invocation. It does not state when not to use it, but for a read-only catalog lookup that is a minor omission.

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