Read a page of documented Balena v7 OData resources to retrieve fleet, device, release, and organization data without modifying anything. Excludes API and SSH keys.
Read a page of a documented Balena v7 OData resource. This tool never changes data. API keys and SSH keys are excluded.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| top | No | ||
| skip | No | ||
| expand | No | ||
| filter | No | ||
| select | No | ||
| orderby | No | ||
| resource | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description reinforces this with 'never changes data' and adds unique context: API keys and SSH keys are excluded. It also qualifies the tool as working on documented v7 OData resources, which is useful beyond the structured metadata.
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?
Two short sentences, both substantive: the first states the operation and the second adds safety and scope exclusions. The key action is front-loaded and no filler is present.
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 generic OData query tool with 7 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and many specialized sibling tools, the description is too thin. It fails to explain how to construct filters, expansions, or selections, and gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over list/get siblings, despite annotations covering safety.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0% across 7 parameters, and the description offers no explanation of top, skip, expand, filter, select, orderby, or resource semantics beyond 'page.' The agent must infer OData query syntax entirely from parameter names and constraints, with no compensating detail in the description.
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 opens with 'Read a page of a documented Balena v7 OData resource,' giving a specific verb, object, and scope. It clearly marks this as the generic read-only query tool, distinct from the create/update/delete siblings, and adds an explicit exclusion for API/SSH keys.
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 is provided. The description does not mention the many specific balena_list_* and balena_get_* siblings, nor when an agent should prefer this generic OData resource query over those wrappers. The only implicit signal is 'documented resource,' which is too weak.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.