List available instruction definition templates to see which instructions can be sent to devices. Filter by instruction type for targeted results.
List all available Instruction Definitions (the templates that describe what instructions can be sent to devices).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| instructionType | No | Optional filter by instruction type |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly implies a read-only listing operation and explains the domain concept, but it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or how the instructionType filter behaves (e.g., exact match vs partial match).
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then clarifies the domain object in a parenthetical. There is no redundant information or filler.
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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. The only notable gap is the lack of guidance on how this tool relates to the search/get-by-name/get-by-id sibling tools.
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 schema already documents the single optional parameter with 100% coverage, stating it is an optional filter by instruction type. The description adds no new details about format, allowed values, or filtering semantics, so it provides minimal value beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('Instruction Definitions'), and adds a helpful parenthetical explaining that these are templates describing what can be sent to devices. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from instruction_definitions_search, but 'List all available' conveys a broad enumeration rather than a targeted lookup.
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 is given about when to use this tool versus closely related siblings like instruction_definitions_search, instruction_definitions_get_by_id, or instruction_definitions_get_by_name. The optional instructionType filter is mentioned, but no use cases or exclusions are described.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.