Retrieve all active devices for the authenticated Stashcat user to audit and manage session access.
Lists all active devices for the authenticated user.
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": "list_active_devices"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It conveys the read-only nature via 'Lists' and 'active devices,' but doesn't specify what constitutes 'active,' whether pagination is supported, or the exact return format. It adds some behavioral context beyond the empty schema.
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?
Single sentence, immediately front-loaded with the action and subject, no filler or repetition.
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?
For a zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and for whom. It could mention the meaning of 'active' but is otherwise complete.
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?
Tool has 0 parameters, so baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies no arguments needed, and there is nothing more to add.
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?
The description uses the specific verb 'Lists' with the resource 'active devices' and scoping to 'the authenticated user', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like deactivate_device which operate on devices rather than list them.
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?
While no explicit alternatives are mentioned, the scope 'for the authenticated user' provides clear context that this is for querying the current user's devices. There are no sibling tools that list devices, so no exclusion is necessary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.