get_camera_devicesRetrieves the list of downstream camera devices connected to an iKuai router, so you can inspect and manage network cameras from AI assistants.
获取下联摄像头设备列表
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| 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?
readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description does not contradict it. However, it adds nothing behavioral beyond the name: no note on scoping, pagination, empty results, or whether only online cameras are returned.
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?
A single six-character phrase with no waste and the resource is front-loaded, but it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is parameter-free. Still, for an agent choosing among 200+ sibling tools, the description is too thin to convey scope (which cameras, which state) or when to call it.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate.
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?
States a specific verb+resource: retrieving the list of downstream ('下联') camera devices. An agent can distinguish it from list_ap_devices and get_peripheral_devices by the camera-specific resource, though 'downstream' is vague about topology.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, no prerequisites. The description only says what it fetches, leaving the agent to infer when this list is relevant versus get_peripheral_devices.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.