Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MikroMCP

MikroMCP

by AliKarami
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Manage IP Service

manage_ip_service
DestructiveIdempotent

Enable or disable RouterOS IP services (api, api-ssl, ssh, telnet, www, www-ssl, winbox, ftp) to control router access without changing ports, helping prevent lockout.

Instructions

Enable or disable a RouterOS IP service (api, api-ssl, ssh, telnet, www, www-ssl, winbox, ftp). Port number changes are intentionally not supported to prevent accidental lockout. MikroMCP reaches RouterOS through the REST API on www-ssl (or www for plaintext): disabling the service its connection uses cuts MikroMCP off from the router, including any later call to re-enable it.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesService name to manage (api, api-ssl, ssh, telnet, www, www-ssl, winbox, ftp)
actionYesAction to perform — only enable/disable to prevent accidental lockout from changing ports
dryRunNoPreview changes without applying.
routerIdNoRouter ID; omit to use the default router.
confirmationTokenNoToken from a prior APPROVAL_REQUIRED response. Re-submit the identical call with this token to confirm the destructive action.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.6.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / dryRun / description
      Previous value: -"Preview changes without applying"New value: +"Preview changes without applying."
    • changedInput schema / properties / routerId / description
      Previous value: -"Target router identifier from the router registry"New value: +"Router ID; omit to use the default router."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "routerId",
-  "action",
-  "name"
-]New value: +[
+  "action",
+  "name"
+]
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered, but the description goes well beyond: it explains that port changes are deliberately unsupported to prevent lockout and warns that disabling www-ssl/www severs MikroMCP's own REST connection, preventing even a later re-enable. That self-lockout warning is critical behavioral context not carried by structured fields.

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?

Three tight sentences, each earning its place, with the core enable/disable purpose front-loaded and the lockout caveat following logically. No filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description supplies everything an agent needs: valid services, the mutation model, the confirmation-token workflow is covered by the schema, and the dangerous self-lockout scenario is spelled out. Nothing material is missing.

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 name/action enums and the dryRun/confirmationToken semantics are already documented. The description reinforces why only enable/disable is allowed but adds little syntax or format detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline-3 expectation when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb pair (enable/disable) and resource (RouterOS IP service) and enumerates the valid service set, which clearly separates it from the sibling list_ip_services read tool. An agent knows exactly what it mutates without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear context for when to use it and a strong caution about the consequences of use (disabling the connection service locks out MikroMCP). It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but the only near-sibling is list_ip_services, which serves a different purpose, so the routing guidance is adequate.

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