ignition-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

perspective_session_props_get

Retrieve perspective session properties for a specified Ignition project. This read-only tool accesses session data from the bridge plane.

Instructions

Read-only, bridge plane.

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "perspective_session_props_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

While 'Read-only' hints at non-destructive behavior, the term 'bridge plane' is unexplained. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for transparency but adds minimal insight beyond the name.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is overly terse (two words), which is under-specification rather than conciseness. A helpful description would provide context, but this is inadequate.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to explain what session properties are returned or how the tool behaves. It is completely insufficient for agent understanding.

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?

The sole parameter 'project' has 0% schema coverage and no description. The tool description adds no meaning, leaving the agent to guess its purpose and valid values.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Read-only, bridge plane' is vague and does not clearly state what the tool does. It fails to specify that it retrieves session properties, relying on the tool name to infer purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. siblings like perspective_list_sessions or perspective_page_config_get. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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