hdhomerun_poke_record_engineTriggers the record engine to recompute upcoming recording tasks after adding, changing, or deleting a recording rule.
POST /recording_events.post?sync.
Tells the record engine to recompute upcoming record tasks — call after adding/changing/deleting a recording rule.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| storage_engine_base_url | 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 readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is a recompute trigger rather than a data mutation, which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about blocking/synchronous behavior (aside from the '?sync' token in the URL), failure modes, or what a caller gets back.
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?
Two short sentences with no filler, and the effect statement is front-loaded before the usage hint. The raw HTTP path template is a minor piece of noise but also conveys the target parameter.
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 exists, so the description should say what a successful poke returns or how failures surface; it does not. Purpose and trigger are complete, but the caller has to guess at the response shape for a fire-and-forget HTTP POST.
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%, so the description carries the burden for the single required parameter. The endpoint template '<storage engine BaseURL>/recording_events.post' does identify it as the storage engine base URL, but gives no format example (scheme/host/port) or default.
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 and effect: 'Tells the record engine to recompute upcoming record tasks'. This distinguishes it clearly from the read-side sibling hdhomerun_get_record_engine_status and from the rule-mutating tools.
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?
'call after adding/changing/deleting a recording rule' gives an explicit trigger condition tied to sibling operations. It stops short of naming the specific alternatives (e.g. hdhomerun_add_series_rule, hdhomerun_change_rule) or stating when not to call it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.