Home Assistant MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List areas

list_areas

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all Home Assistant areas with ID, name, and assigned entity count to help you review physical zones and entity coverage.

Instructions

List every area (physical zone) with its id, name and the number of entities assigned to it.

Tool call template

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_areas"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety behavior is fully covered structurally. The description adds that results include a per-area entity count, which is genuinely extra information not derivable from the annotations. It does not mention ordering, pagination, or what happens with zero areas.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single sentence with the resource and its returned fields front-loaded. Every clause carries information and there is no filler or restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-argument, read-only list tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the one thing structured data cannot: the shape of the returned record. Only the missing contrast with get_area_summary keeps it below a 5.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for parameter-free tools applies. The description usefully confirms there is no filtering argument by saying it lists *every* area, which heads off attempts to pass filters.

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

Purpose4/5

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

"List every area (physical zone)" gives a specific verb and resource, and the parenthetical disambiguates the term 'area' for an unfamiliar agent. It also names the returned attributes (id, name, entity count). It stops short of distinguishing itself from the related get_area_summary sibling, which is the only real ambiguity.

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?

The description describes what the tool returns but never says when to reach for it versus get_area_summary (single-area detail) or get_home_overview. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or routing hints, so an agent must infer selection from the tool name alone.

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