fw-context-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_projects

List all indexed firmware projects with statistics to discover what is available at session start. Read-only, showing symbol counts, build systems, and analysis coverage.

Instructions

List all indexed firmware projects with their statistics.

Read-only. No side effects. Use at session start to discover available projects; use get_active_build for details on the currently active project.

indexed_at and first_indexed_at are UTC, in "YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS" format — the same format that get_active_build returns.

analysis holds the project and vendor counts only. For the model, analyze_vendor, and complete fields, call get_active_build for that project.

Args: project_root: Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass to distinguish multiple indexed projects. project: Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.

Returns: list of dicts, each with: project_id, name, root_path, build_system, symbol_count, file_count, indexed_at (str — UTC), description (str), first_indexed_at (str — UTC), schema_version, current_schema, reindex_needed (bool), status (str — "ready" or "reindex_needed"), db (path to SQLite database file), variant_count (int — number of build variants), image_count (int — number of sysbuild images), analysis (dict — LLM-analysis coverage {project: {analyzed, skipped, total}, vendor: {analyzed, skipped, total}}, or None when no build is indexed).

When no project has an index, the result is a single dict with an
``info`` key.  When fw-context cannot read a database, the result
holds a dict with ``db`` and ``error`` keys for that file.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project`	No	Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.
`project_root`	No	Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass to distinguish multiple indexed projects. This field also accepts a project name or a project_id, but project is the clear field for those.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.30.0Sep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / project

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.",
+  "title": "Project"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / project_root / description

Previous value: -"Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass to distinguish multiple indexed projects."New value: +"Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass to distinguish multiple indexed projects. This field also accepts a project name or a project_id, but project is the clear field for those."

First observedv0.1.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and meets it: it declares 'Read-only. No side effects.' It also discloses return behavior, UTC timestamp formats, and edge cases such as no indexed project or a database that cannot be read. This goes well beyond what structured fields would convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-organized and front-loaded: purpose, read-only note, usage guidance, then params and returns. It is long, but most content is useful; the main inefficiency is that the Args section partly duplicates the input-schema descriptions.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations and no required parameters, this description is fully self-contained: it covers when to use the tool, how to choose between parameters, return shape, timestamp semantics, and unusual result cases. There is no critical gap an agent would need to guess at.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage and already explains both project and project_root, including the distinction between them. The description's Args section mostly mirrors the schema, adding no meaningful new parameter semantics beyond what is already available.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List all indexed firmware projects with their statistics.' It also distinguishes itself from get_active_build by noting that the latter provides details on the currently active project, so an agent can tell the tools apart.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says to use this tool at session start to discover available projects and directs the agent to get_active_build for active-project details. It also explains when to pass project_root versus project and warns not to give both, which is clear routing guidance.

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