iaqualink-mcp

iaqualink_set_schedule

Idempotent

Set or disable an eXO salt-chlorinator timer (pump, chlorinator or aux) with start and stop times, pump rpm and an enable flag, confirming the change before it applies.

Instructions

Change one eXO salt-chlorinator timer (pump, chlorinator or aux): set its start and stop time (24-hour HH:MM) and enable it, set rpm on a variable-speed pump timer, or disable it (enabled: false clears it to 00:00–00:00, as the app does). Identify the timer by its key (sch3), id (sch_3), name or endpoint (ssp_1) from iaqualink_list_schedules. A chlorinator timer must stay inside its pump timer’s window. eXO systems only — for a Jandy AquaLink RS panel use iaqualink_add_schedule / iaqualink_edit_schedule / iaqualink_delete_schedule. The eXO applies changes asynchronously; the result says whether a re-read confirmed it. Unverified on live hardware (shape from community Home Assistant integrations). Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "serial": "<serial>",
      "schedule": "<schedule>"
    },
    "name": "iaqualink_set_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rpm`	No	Pump speed — variable-speed pump (vsp_*) timers only
`stop`	No	Stop time, 24-hour HH:MM, after start (required to enable)
`start`	No	Start time, 24-hour HH:MM (required to enable)
`serial`	Yes	System serial number, from iaqualink_list_systems
`enabled`	No	false = disable and clear the timer
`schedule`	Yes	Timer key (sch3), id (sch_3), name or endpoint (ssp_1)
`confirmToken`	No	ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses that disabling clears the window to 00:00–00:00 as the app does, that the panel applies changes asynchronously and the result reports whether a re-read confirmed it, and that the behavior is unverified on live hardware. The confirmation protocol (elicitation where supported, otherwise preview + confirmToken on a repeat call) is fully spelled out.

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?

It is front-loaded with the operation and its variants, then prerequisites and the confirmation contract, with no filler sentences. It runs long and restates some schema-declared facts (enabled clearing the timer, rpm range), which costs a point but not clarity.

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?

A mutation tool on an async device with no output schema, yet the description covers what happens to existing values on disable, how success is verified, the fallback confirmation flow, and the platform restriction. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it safely 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by giving the accepted identifier forms (key sch3, id sch_3, name, endpoint ssp_1) and by tying serial to iaqualink_list_systems and rpm to vsp_* timers. The chlorinator-inside-pump-window constraint is relational semantics the schema cannot express, though per-parameter detail is partly duplicated from the schema.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: change one timer (pump, chlorinator or aux) on an eXO salt-chlorinator, covering start/stop, enable/disable, and rpm. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the Jandy AquaLink RS siblings (iaqualink_add_schedule / edit_schedule / delete_schedule), so an agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It names the platform boundary (eXO only, use the add/edit/delete schedule tools for RS panels) and states a hard precondition: a chlorinator timer must stay inside its pump timer's window. It also tells the agent where to get the timer identifier (iaqualink_list_schedules) and that rpm applies only to vsp_* timers.

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