Lists all configured Syncthing devices with their IDs and connection status, helping you monitor which peers are connected.
List all configured devices with their IDs and connection status
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does not state whether the list is cached or live, whether it requires a running daemon, or whether status values are computed per call. For a status-reporting tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a meaningful gap.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause earns its place: it names the resource, the identity field, and the status field.
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?
The description covers the core output shape, but with no output schema, no annotations, and a crowded sibling set, more context would be needed for an agent to confidently choose this over syncthing_get_connections or similar tools. Adequate but with clear gaps.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. There is nothing further for the description to add, and it doesn't misrepresent the signature.
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 (List) and resource (configured devices) and describes what is returned (IDs and connection status). It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling syncthing_get_connections, which likely covers connection information but at a different level of abstraction, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
Pure capability statement with no when-to-use context, prerequisites, or comparison to alternatives. With siblings like get_status and get_connections, an agent gets no signal about when this list view is preferred. No usage guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.