Skip to main content
Glama
AliKarami

MikroMCP

by AliKarami
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List DHCP Clients

list_dhcp_clients
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve DHCP client configurations from a MikroTik router to see which interfaces use DHCP, their status, and assigned IP addresses. Filter by interface or status.

Instructions

List DHCP client configurations on a MikroTik router. Shows which interfaces obtain their IP via DHCP, current status, and assigned address.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results to return.
offsetNoPagination offset.
statusNoFilter by DHCP client statusall
routerIdNoRouter ID; omit to use the default router.
interfaceNoFilter by interface or display name (exact match)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / interface / description
      Previous value: -"Filter by interface name (exact match)"New value: +"Filter by interface or display name (exact match)"
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.6.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Maximum number of clients to return"New value: +"Max results to return."
    • changedInput schema / properties / offset / description
      Previous value: -"Offset for pagination"New value: +"Pagination offset."
    • changedInput schema / properties / routerId / description
      Previous value: -"Target router identifier from the router registry"New value: +"Router ID; omit to use the default router."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "routerId"
-]
  3. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds the useful detail that output includes interface, DHCP status, and assigned address, but says nothing about pagination defaults, result ordering, or the default-router behavior when routerId is omitted.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with zero filler. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with annotated safety, fully documented parameters, and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it covers the resource and the shape of the returned data. The only gap is that it doesn't hint at pagination scaling or how status/interface filters interact with the results.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters (limit, offset, status, routerId, interface) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides; baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (DHCP client configurations) on MikroTik, and the second sentence explains what data those configurations expose. It is distinguishable from list_dhcp_servers/list_dhcp_leases by the word 'client', though it never names the siblings.

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?

The description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no routing to alternatives such as manage_dhcp_client for mutations or list_dhcp_leases for server-side leases. Usage is only inferable from the tool name and read-only annotations.

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