Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
sylvia-iot-mcp

sylvia-iot-mcp

by woofdogtw
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

device_get

Retrieve complete details for a specific IoT device using its unique device ID. Get current configuration, status, and metadata in one call.

Instructions

Get details of a specific device.

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": {
      "deviceId": "<deviceId>"
    },
    "name": "device_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deviceIdYesThe device ID to retrieve.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details' and does not mention return format, error behavior for unknown IDs, auth requirements, or absence of side effects. The verb implies a read operation, but little else is transparent.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the operation and target.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple and its sole parameter is fully documented, but there is no output schema and the description does not clarify what 'details' include or what happens when the deviceId is not found. It is minimally adequate for selection and invocation but leaves ambiguity.

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 schema fully documents the only parameter, deviceId, with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage 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?

The description clearly states the operation ('Get') and the resource ('specific device'), making its purpose obvious. It is distinguishable from device_list and device_count by the 'specific device' phrasing, though 'details' is somewhat generic.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like device_list or device_count. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned; only the singular 'specific device' implies a one-device lookup.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools