ScreenConnect MCP Server

screenconnect_sessions_list_online

Read-onlyIdempotent

List online connected guest sessions in ScreenConnect, with optional session-type filtering and pagination. Use it to find active support, meeting, or access sessions.

Instructions

List connected guest sessions. Session type defaults to Access.

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": "screenconnect_sessions_list_online"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`includeRaw`	No
`sessionType`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description does add one genuinely useful behavior: sessionType defaults to Access when unspecified, which is not present in the schema. It says nothing about pagination behavior, result volume, or what a 'connected' session means.

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 short front-loaded sentences with no filler. The brevity is efficient but edges toward under-specification rather than pure conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With four parameters at 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotation-independent explanation of paging or includeRaw, the definition leaves real gaps for an agent trying to call it correctly. Annotations cover safety but not invocation semantics.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden, yet it only accounts for sessionType and its default. limit, offset and includeRaw are entirely undocumented anywhere, leaving half the parameter surface ambiguous (e.g., includeRaw of what?).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List connected guest sessions.' An agent can tell this is a read/list operation over currently connected sessions. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings such as screenconnect_sessions_search or screenconnect_sessions_get_by_name, so the boundary is left implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to choose this over screenconnect_sessions_search or the get_* siblings, and no stated prerequisites. The only usage-adjacent information is that session type defaults to Access, which is a filter behavior rather than a selection rule.

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

Deploy Server