Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Home Assistant MCP Server

Home Assistant MCP Server

by rilhia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List scripts

list_scripts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists Home Assistant scripts with state, last triggered time, mode, and config ID, with optional filtering by name or ID to locate specific scripts.

Instructions

List scripts with their state, last triggered time, mode and config id. Optionally filter by a word in the name or id.

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_scripts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum rows.
queryNoSubstring to match against name, entity id or config id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

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 the safety profile is fully covered without description help. The description does add value by disclosing the returned attributes (state, last triggered time, mode, config id), which matters given there is no output schema. It says nothing about result volume, pagination, or truncation behavior, which is the main remaining gap.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and result shape, with the optional filter stated second. Nothing is wasted, though the field enumeration is dense and could be tightened.

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 simple two-parameter, zero-required read tool with full annotation coverage and full schema coverage, the description is nearly sufficient; listing returned fields compensates for the absent output schema. The only missing piece is any statement about result limits or how many rows typically come back.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, making 3 the baseline. The description's note about filtering is slightly narrower than the schema (it says name or id, while the schema says name, entity id, or config id) and it never mentions the limit parameter, so it adds little beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("List scripts") and enumerates the salient returned fields (state, last triggered time, mode, config id). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_script, so it falls short of the sibling-differentiation bar for a 5, but the purpose itself is unambiguous.

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?

"Optionally filter by a word in the name or id" implies the browse-then-narrow workflow, which is a reasonable usage cue. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_script for a single script, and no stated exclusions or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools