HomeLab MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

frigate_events

Retrieve recent security camera events from Frigate using filters for time, labels, and cameras to review what happened.

Instructions

Consulta eventos recientes de Frigate.

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": "frigate_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`after`	No
`limit`	No
`before`	No
`labels`	No	all
`cameras`	No	all

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but 'Consulta eventos recientes' only implies a read operation. It does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, default limits, time-range semantics, or whether it returns metadata versus full event details.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single efficient, front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is good for conciseness. However, given five optional parameters and no annotations, it is undersized for the tool's complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A one-line purpose statement is not enough for a tool with five undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. An agent lacks the information needed to call it correctly or interpret the response.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it adds no meaning to after, before, limit, labels, or cameras. It fails to explain timestamp formats, label syntax, or camera filtering, leaving all five parameters effectively undocumented.

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 a specific action ('Consulta' = query) and a resource ('eventos recientes de Frigate' = recent Frigate events), so an agent can infer the basic function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like frigate_review or frigate_stats, so it misses the top 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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over frigate_review or frigate_stats, nor any mention of filters such as cameras or labels. The description only states what the tool does, not when it should be used.

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