Home Assistant MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List dashboards

list_dashboards

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all Home Assistant dashboards with URL path, title, storage/YAML mode, and sidebar settings, placing the default Overview dashboard first.

Instructions

List all dashboards with their url_path, title, mode (storage or yaml) and sidebar settings. The default Overview dashboard is listed first.

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_dashboards"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It does add real behavioral context beyond the annotations: the exact fields returned including the storage/yaml mode, and the deterministic ordering that places the Overview dashboard first. It says nothing about result size or failure modes, which keeps it below a 4.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero wasted words. The returned-field list comes first and the ordering caveat (Overview first) follows immediately, so the most surprising behavior is surfaced early.

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?

No parameters and no output schema mean the description has to describe the return shape, and it does so at the field level, supplemented by annotations that cover safety. Minor gaps remain: "sidebar settings" is left unexplained, and nothing indicates what happens when no dashboards are configured.

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 of 4 applies, and the description does not clutter the definition with pointless parameter talk.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ("List all dashboards") and enumerates the returned fields: url_path, title, mode, sidebar settings. It does not explicitly name the sibling get_dashboard or say how this differs from it, but the list-vs-get distinction is obvious from the names.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of what to do with the results, and no pointer to get_dashboard for single-dashboard detail. Usage is implied by the verb "List" and by the presence of sibling get_* tools, but nothing is stated.

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