hdhomerun_get_itemRetrieve raw values for any supported HDHomeRun item path by tuner ID. Use it to query device settings, status, and diagnostic fields directly.
hdhomerun_config <id> get <item> — raw get of any supported item path.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful detail that this is a raw CLI passthrough (implying unprocessed output), but it does not say what happens on an unsupported item path or what the raw return looks like.
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?
One short line with no filler, and the identifying CLI form leads. It is efficient but under-specified rather than concise — the brevity comes at the cost of any usable detail.
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?
No output schema and a 0%-coverage parameter mean the description must carry the burden, yet it omits valid item paths, output format, and error behavior. For a generic escape-hatch tool this leaves too much for the agent to guess.
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?
Schema coverage is 0% and the single parameter is named `name` while the description refers to `<item>` and an unlisted `<id>`, leaving the mapping and the accepted item-path vocabulary unexplained. With no enumeration of supported paths, the agent cannot construct a valid call except by trial.
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?
It states a concrete operation (a raw get of any supported item path) and anchors it to the underlying CLI invocation `hdhomerun_config <id> get <item>`. However, "item" is never defined, so an agent cannot tell what class of data this returns or how it differs from the many typed getters like hdhomerun_get_channel or hdhomerun_get_tuner_status.
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?
No guidance on when to pick this generic getter over the dozens of specific siblings (get_sys_model, get_lineup, get_tuner_status, etc.), nor when it is unsafe or inappropriate. An agent must infer that this is a fallback for paths without a dedicated tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.