Skip to main content
Glama
appleton

Eufy RoboVac MCP Server

by appleton

robovac_get_work_status

Check the current cleaning status of your Eufy RoboVac to monitor progress and manage cleaning schedules.

Instructions

Get the current work status of the robovac

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoForce refresh of cached data

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler for the 'robovac_get_work_status' tool. Ensures the RoboVac instance is initialized, calls getWorkStatus on the device library with optional force refresh, and formats the result as a text response.
    case "robovac_get_work_status":
      this.ensureRoboVacInitialized();
      const workStatus = await this.robovac!.getWorkStatus(
        args?.force as boolean
      );
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Work Status: ${workStatus}`,
          },
        ],
      };
  • src/server.ts:221-234 (registration)
    Registers the tool in the MCP server's listTools handler by defining its name, description, and input schema in the tools array.
    {
      name: "robovac_get_work_status",
      description: "Get the current work status of the robovac",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          force: {
            type: "boolean",
            description: "Force refresh of cached data",
            default: false,
          },
        },
      },
    },
  • Defines the input schema for the tool, specifying an optional 'force' parameter of type boolean to control data caching.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        force: {
          type: "boolean",
          description: "Force refresh of cached data",
          default: false,
        },
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does without mentioning any behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires connectivity, has rate limits, or returns cached vs. live data. The parameter 'force' hints at caching behavior, but this isn't explained in the description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core function, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'work status' includes (e.g., cleaning mode, progress, errors) or the return format, leaving gaps for a tool that likely provides operational state information. The context signals indicate a simple parameter structure, but the description fails to compensate for missing behavioral and output details.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'force' documented as 'Force refresh of cached data'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, as it doesn't mention parameters at all. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('current work status of the robovac'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'robovac_get_status' or 'robovac_get_all_statuses', which appear to be related status-checking tools, so it doesn't fully distinguish itself from alternatives.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'robovac_get_status' or 'robovac_get_all_statuses'. It lacks context about what 'work status' specifically entails compared to general 'status' or other status-related tools, leaving the agent with no usage criteria.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/appleton/sam'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server