Fetch the DHCP address reservations configured on a TP-Link router. Check which IP addresses are permanently assigned to specific devices.
DHCPアドレス予約一覧。
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_reservations"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about read-only nature, response format, ordering, or pagination. For a zero-parameter listing tool the risk is low, but the description still adds no behavioral context.
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?
A single short phrase with no filler and the resource front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than tight conciseness.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description should at minimum indicate what the list contains or how results are returned. It says only that a reservation list exists, leaving the agent without enough context for a listing operation.
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 there are no parameter semantics to document; the baseline of 4 applies. The description neither adds nor detracts from parameter meaning.
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?
The description 'DHCPアドレス予約一覧' (DHCP address reservation list) names the resource and implies the list verb, adding 'DHCP address' specificity beyond the bare tool name. However it is essentially a restatement of 'list_reservations' and offers no differentiation from siblings like add_reservation or delete_reservation.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to the alternative reservation tools (add_reservation, delete_reservation). The agent must infer the use case entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.