TrueNAS MCP

List Boot Environments

list_boot_environments

Lists TrueNAS boot environments, including active, activated, kernel, and initramfs entries, to help you inspect available boot options.

Instructions

List boot environments (active, activated, kernel/initramfs).

Tool call template

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_boot_environments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; 'List' implies a non-mutating read, which is the main behavioral fact an agent needs. The parenthetical enumerates the per-environment attributes that come back, adding real context beyond the schema, but nothing is said about scope (host-wide vs pool), ordering, or edge cases such as no boot environments existing.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource up front and the returned attributes immediately after — zero filler and no preamble. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description only needs to convey purpose and scope, which it largely does. A note on whether results are host-level or per-pool would close the remaining gap for this read-only utility.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the parenthetical correctly refrains from inventing inputs.

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 boot environments') and names the sub-fields surfaced (active, activated, kernel/initramfs), which distinguishes it from data-oriented siblings like list_snapshots or list_datasets. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with any named sibling, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. On a zero-parameter list tool the omission is tolerable — the resource name implies the use case — but nothing in the text actively guides tool selection.

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