Skip to main content
Glama
appleton

Eufy RoboVac MCP Server

by appleton

robovac_set_work_mode

Control your Eufy RoboVac's cleaning behavior by selecting from modes like AUTO, SPOT, or EDGE for targeted vacuuming tasks.

Instructions

Set the cleaning mode of the robovac

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeYesThe work mode to set

Implementation Reference

  • src/server.ts:120-133 (registration)
    Tool registration in the listTools response, including name, description, and input schema defining the 'mode' parameter with allowed enum values.
      name: "robovac_set_work_mode",
      description: "Set the cleaning mode of the robovac",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          mode: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The work mode to set",
            enum: ["AUTO", "SMALL_ROOM", "SPOT", "EDGE", "NO_SWEEP"],
          },
        },
        required: ["mode"],
      },
    },
  • The handler logic in the CallToolRequest switch statement: ensures RoboVac is initialized, calls setWorkMode on the instance with the provided mode, and returns a success message.
    case "robovac_set_work_mode":
      this.ensureRoboVacInitialized();
      await this.robovac!.setWorkMode(args?.mode as WorkMode);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Work mode set to: ${args?.mode}`,
          },
        ],
      };
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 states this is a 'Set' operation, implying a mutation, but doesn't describe any behavioral traits: it doesn't mention whether this requires the robovac to be online, if changes are immediate or queued, what happens if the mode is invalid, or if there are side effects (e.g., does setting 'AUTO' start cleaning?). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it safely and effectively.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Set the cleaning mode'), making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, and there's no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 complexity (a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address key contextual aspects: behavioral traits (e.g., error handling, state requirements), relationship to sibling tools, or what the tool returns (if anything). For a tool that changes device state, this lack of information could lead to incorrect usage by an agent.

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 a clear enum for the 'mode' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (it doesn't explain what each mode means, e.g., 'SMALL_ROOM' vs. 'SPOT'). Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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 ('Set') and the target ('cleaning mode of the robovac'), which is specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'robovac_get_work_mode' (read vs. write) and 'robovac_start_cleaning' (mode setting vs. action initiation). However, it doesn't explicitly mention that this is a write operation, which slightly reduces clarity compared to a perfect score.

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. For example, it doesn't explain how this relates to 'robovac_start_cleaning' (does setting a mode automatically start cleaning?) or 'robovac_get_work_mode' (should you check current mode first?). There's no mention of prerequisites, such as whether the robovac must be connected or in a specific state.

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