Homelab

homelab_modules

Read-only

Check which homelab modules are enabled, which settings are missing, and whether writes are pre-approved; pass a module name to see its full settings status without exposing values.

Instructions

Which modules are on, which settings are missing, whether writes are pre-approved, and what each tool does. Pass a module name for its full settings list (values are never shown, only whether they are set).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`module`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Default
`skills`	No
`modules`	Yes
`version`	Yes
`homepage`	No	https://github.com/seayniclabs/homelab-infra-mcp
`publisher`	No	Seaynic Labs
`read_only`	Yes
`core_tools`	Yes
`config_file`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv2.1.1Oct 29, 2026

addedOutput schema / $defs / SkillInfo

Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "description": {
+      "title": "Description",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "license": {
+      "title": "License",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "title": "Name",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "name",
+    "description",
+    "license"
+  ],
+  "title": "SkillInfo",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / homepage

Added value: +{
+  "default": "https://github.com/seayniclabs/homelab-infra-mcp",
+  "title": "Homepage",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / publisher

Added value: +{
+  "default": "Seaynic Labs",
+  "title": "Publisher",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / skills

Added value: +{
+  "default": [],
+  "items": {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/SkillInfo"
+  },
+  "title": "Skills",
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedv2.0.0Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, the description adds valuable behavioral context: settings values are never shown, only whether they are set, and it discloses whether writes are pre-approved. It does not cover auth or rate-limit behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

The description is two sentences and front-loads the main capabilities before giving the parameter instruction. It is efficient, though the phrase 'what each tool does' is slightly ambiguous.

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 read-only tool with one optional parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers the key behavioral facts an agent needs: no values are exposed, write pre-approval status is reported, and a module name yields detail. It could be clearer about what happens when no module is passed, but it is largely complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that passing a module name returns that module's full settings list, which adds meaning beyond the bare string parameter. However, it does not specify valid module names, accepted format, or default behavior when omitted beyond implication.

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 the tool's purpose in terms of the questions it answers: module on/off state, missing settings, write pre-approval, and tool descriptions. It is clear enough to distinguish this as an introspection tool, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like infrastructure_overview or homelab_health.

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?

It gives one usage instruction: pass a module name for its full settings list. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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

Deploy Server