get_dhcp_leasesList devices with active DHCP leases and their expiry times from a Keenetic router. Use it to identify connected clients and monitor when leases expire.
Get list of devices with active DHCP leases including expiry time
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.9.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only that results are 'active' leases and include expiry time — modest extra context. No mention of pagination, sorting, or what happens when no leases exist.
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?
One short sentence with no filler, front-loaded on the resource. The phrasing 'Get list of' is slightly clipped/ungrammatical but costs nothing in clarity.
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 parameterless read-only listing with no output schema, the description is sufficient: it identifies the resource and signals the returned field of interest (expiry time). It could note the return shape or empty-result behavior, but nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline is 4. There are no argument semantics for the description to clarify or omit.
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?
Specific verb+resource: 'Get list of devices with active DHCP leases', plus a scope detail (expiry time). It is clearly distinguishable from get_dhcp_static (static reservations), though it never names a sibling explicitly.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus get_dhcp_static, get_clients, or get_dhcp_leases-adjacent siblings, and no prerequisites. The 'active' qualifier hints at scope but is not framed as usage advice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.