ipcam-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List cameras

list_cameras

Read-only

Lists configured cameras with their IDs, UIDs, types, scenes, and capabilities; set include_removed to true to also show removed cameras still on disk for cleanup.

Instructions

List configured cameras with their ids (names), uids, types, scenes (the place each one watches) and capabilities (camera, ptz). include_removed=true also lists removed cameras whose files are still on disk ("removed": true), e.g. to clean them up with delete_camera.

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": "list_cameras"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`include_removed`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.1Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real value on top by explaining what include_removed actually returns (files still on disk, marked "removed": true) and the cleanup workflow it enables. It does not discuss ordering or pagination, which is the remaining gap.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its returned fields, then the parameter behavior. Parenthetical glosses on 'names' and 'the place each one watches' add clarity at minor cost to tightness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape details are optional, yet the description still names the key fields an agent will act on. With one optional parameter fully explained and the removed-vs-active distinction made explicit, nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for include_removed, so the description carries the burden and does so: it explains the flag's effect, the trigger condition for using it, and the marker it produces in results. Only the default of false is left to the schema rather than restated.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List configured cameras') followed by an enumeration of returned fields (ids/names, uids, types, scenes, capabilities), which tells an agent exactly what surface this tool exposes. The mention of 'delete_camera' as a follow-up further separates it from the mutating camera siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a concrete condition for the only parameter (include_removed=true surfaces still-on-disk removed cameras) and names a downstream use case, cleanup with delete_camera. It stops short of stating when another tool should be used instead, but for a straightforward enumeration tool the context is clear.

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