instabox-mcp

List SSH tokens

instabox_list_ssh_tokens

Read-onlyIdempotent

List a machine's SSH tokens by machine ID or unique name, newest first, without exposing token secrets.

Instructions

List a machine's SSH tokens (newest first), without their secrets.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "instabox_list_ssh_tokens"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Machine ID (m_...) or its unique name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyIdempotent non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds two real behavioral facts: results are ordered newest-first and token secrets are stripped from the response. That redaction detail is genuinely useful given there is no output schema. It stops short of 5 because no pagination/limit or result-count behavior is described.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the two useful qualifiers (ordering, secret redaction) in parentheses rather than padding. Nothing extraneous.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool with rich annotations, the description covers scope, ordering, and response redaction. It leaves a small gap in not pointing to instabox_create_ssh_token or revoke_ssh_tokens as the lifecycle counterpart, and no output schema means the shape of each token entry is only partially characterized.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter is already documented as 'Machine ID (m_...) or its unique name'. The phrase 'a machine's' in the description merely restates that the id selects a machine, adding no format or edge-case detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List a machine's SSH tokens'), scoped to a single machine, which cleanly separates it from sibling mutations like instabox_create_ssh_token and instabox_revoke_ssh_tokens. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'List' and by the qualifier that secrets are omitted, which hints that token values are only obtainable elsewhere (at creation). There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no named alternative, and no prerequisites spelled out.

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