Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
meraki-dashboard-api

meraki-dashboard-api

by Flagler-County-BoCC
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

switch-list-stacks

List switch stacks in a network to view stack members, serials, and virtual MAC addresses.

Instructions

List the switch stacks in a network. (read-only)

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": {
      "networkId": "<networkId>"
    },
    "name": "switch-list-stacks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
networkIdYesNetwork ID
fieldsNoReturn only these top-level fields; omit for all. Available: id, isMonitorOnly, members, name, serials, virtualMac.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description only states 'read-only'. It fails to disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, error handling, or response structure. For a listing operation, basic safety is implied but not explicitly covered.

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 sentence with the read-only annotation appended. It is front-loaded, contains no filler, and communicates the essential purpose efficiently.

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?

Given the low complexity (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks an explanation of what constitutes a 'stack' or the expected return format, which could leave the agent uncertain about the tool's output.

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 provides full coverage (100%) with descriptions for both parameters: networkId and fields. The description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema handles the burden.

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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'switch stacks', and the scope 'in a network'. It explicitly marks the operation as read-only. This distinctively identifies the tool among siblings that list other switch aspects like ports, statuses, etc.

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 its many siblings (e.g., switch-list-ports, switch-list-statuses). The agent receives no context about scenarios where listing stacks is appropriate or preferred over other switch list operations.

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