Discover and list VISA instruments on your host with the list_resources tool from the MHO98 MCP Server. Find connected devices and their resource strings for instrument addressing.
List VISA resources visible on this host.
Note: raw-socket instruments are not discoverable; the MHO98 must be
addressed by its resource string (see connect).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description discloses a key behavioral constraint: raw-socket instruments are not discoverable. It implies a read-only listing operation but does not elaborate on side effects or failure modes. For a simple discovery tool, this added context is valuable and sufficient.
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 sentences: the primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by a focused note. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.
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?
Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the tool's core behavior and an important limitation. It does not explicitly state the return format (e.g., a list of resource strings), but the purpose implies it. Overall complete for a simple discovery tool.
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 no parameters, so the schema is empty and there is nothing for the description to clarify. Per the rules, a parameterless tool receives a baseline of 4.
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 'VISA resources' with scope 'visible on this host'. The note distinguishes discoverable resources from raw-socket instruments that require `connect`, helping the agent differentiate this tool from siblings.
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?
Explicitly states when this tool is insufficient: raw-socket instruments are not discoverable and must be addressed via `connect`. This provides clear when-not guidance and names the alternative, leaving no inference needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.