Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-airq

mcp-airq

Official
by CorantGmbH
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

configure_network

DestructiveIdempotent

Set network configuration on air-Q devices using DHCP or static IP parameters, then restart the device to apply changes.

Instructions

Configure network settings. Set dhcp=True for DHCP, or provide ip/subnet/gateway/dns for static IP.

After changing network settings, the device must be restarted.

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": "configure_network"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dhcpNo
ipNo
subnetNo
gatewayNo
dnsNo
deviceNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.6.3

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds the important behavioral note that the device must be restarted after configuration change, which supplements the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). No contradiction with annotations is apparent.

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 concise sentences deliver all necessary information without extraneous text. The structure is clear: purpose, mode instructions, and post-configuration behavior.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, output schema exists, annotations provided), the description is sufficient for an agent to understand the core functionality. Minor gap: missing explanation of the 'device' parameter, but overall adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for 5 of 6 parameters by explaining the DHCP/static IP modes and which parameters belong to each. However, it does not explain the 'device' parameter, and it omits format details for IP addresses.

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 it configures network settings and explains the two modes (DHCP vs static IP). It is distinct from sibling tools like set_brightness or restart_device, though it could more explicitly mention it targets a device.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when to choose DHCP versus static IP. The description only mentions parameter options without contextual usage advice.

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