Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
starlink-enterprise-mcp

starlink-enterprise-mcp

by WiFiWoW
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

post_user_terminals_by_device_id_reboot

Destructive

Reboot a Starlink terminal by providing its device ID, kit serial, or dish serial. Required permission: Device command and configuration, Edit.

Instructions

Reboot user terminal — Required permission: Device command and configuration, Edit. — [POST /public/v2/user-terminals/{deviceId}/reboot]

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": "post_user_terminals_by_device_id_reboot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deviceIdYesUser terminal ID, kit serial number, or dish serial number.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, but description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that. It does not describe reboot effects (e.g., immediate, impact on sessions) or what the tool returns.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is very concise, including the permission requirement and endpoint. However, it could be better structured with clear separation of information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema, the description should explain the return value or behavior. It lacks this context, leaving the agent uncertain about what happens after the reboot command is issued.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for deviceId. The tool's description adds no additional parameter semantics, but baseline 3 is appropriate given schema covers the parameter.

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?

Description states 'Reboot user terminal' clearly indicating the action and resource. Among siblings, post_routers_by_router_id_reboot covers router reboots, so the tool is sufficiently distinguished by resource type.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The required permission is mentioned, but no context on prerequisites or comparisons to sibling tools like post_routers_by_router_id_reboot.

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