nickol-knx-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

load_ga_export

Load an ETS group-address export XML when only the GA list is available, enabling naming, DPT, security checks, and report generation.

Instructions

Load an ETS group-address export (ga-export/01 XML) instead of a full .knxproj.

For when you only have the GA list: an ETS "Export Group Addresses" file, or the
ETS import file a planning tool produces (TapPlan and similar). Names, addresses,
DPTs, descriptions, the security flag and the range tree are read; the result
replaces the loaded project for every other tool.

Works: check_naming, check_missing_status, check_dpt, check_policy, check_secure,
analyze_all, suggest_repairs, project_report, generate_ha_package,
generate_ets_group_addresses. Nothing to read (the export has no devices, ETS
Functions or topology): get_devices, get_topology, check_topology,
decompose_device, check_device_parameters, parse_devices_from_project. Pairing
relies on names only, since there are no ETS Function roles.

Args:
    path: Path to the exported .xml file.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.8.2Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and meets it: it discloses the state-changing side effect ('the result replaces the loaded project for every other tool'), the data that is extracted, the absence of devices/functions/topology, and the name-only pairing limitation. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent must know before calling a load tool.

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?

The description is long, but it is cleanly organized into purpose, usage trigger, data content, effect, tool-compatibility matrix, and caveat paragraphs, with the core purpose front-loaded. The tool-name lists are bulky but carry real routing value for an agent deciding which tool to pair with this loader.

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 one-parameter loader with an output schema, nothing essential is missing: the return contract is left to the output schema, while the description covers purpose, side effects, compatibility, and limitations. The only conceivable addition would be explicitly naming load_project as the alternative, but the contrast is already clear from 'instead of a full .knxproj.'

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 single parameter has zero schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. The Args section states 'path: Path to the exported .xml file,' which together with the main description's 'ga-export/01 XML' context conveys the file type and purpose. It is adequate but adds little beyond that basic meaning.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Load an ETS group-address export (ga-export/01 XML) instead of a full .knxproj.' It signals that this is the GA-only counterpart to the full-project load, distinguishing it from the sibling load_project, and enumerates exactly what is read (names, addresses, DPTs, descriptions, security flag, range tree).

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?

Gives the explicit trigger condition ('For when you only have the GA list') and names the exact accepted file types (ETS 'Export Group Addresses' file, TapPlan-like planning imports). It goes further than most definitions by enumerating which downstream tools work after loading and which have 'nothing to read,' plus the pairing-relies-on-names caveat.

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