Select the active KVM device by id, host, or alias before sending commands. This required step prepares the system for subsequent tools without sending input.
Select the active device by id, host, or alias. Sends no input itself; required before other tools. (read tier)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| device | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the safety disclosure burden itself. It explicitly states 'Sends no input itself' and marks the operation as 'read tier', which tells the agent it is non-mutating. It also communicates statefulness by requiring selection before other tools. It does not explain failure behavior or active-device persistence, but the key behavioral traits are covered.
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?
The description is three short sentences, each contributing a distinct piece of information: selection mechanism, non-input behavior, and required sequencing. It is front-loaded with the primary action and avoids 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 one-parameter selection tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the parameter's accepted forms, the operation's safety profile, and its prerequisite role. It is sufficient for correct invocation. It could mention how to list valid devices or what happens on invalid input, but those are secondary for such a simple tool.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning for the single 'device' parameter. It does so by specifying that it accepts an id, host, or alias, which is essential knowledge beyond the bare string type. It could add more detail about format or how to discover valid values, but the core semantics are present.
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 clearly states the specific action — select the active device — and adds the distinct scoping dimension that selection can be by id, host, or alias. It also separates this tool from siblings by noting it sends no input and is a prerequisite, making its role unambiguous.
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?
The description provides clear usage context: select a device before using other tools. It implicitly tells the agent this is a setup step rather than an input action. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but for a prerequisite tool this is strong guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.