Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AsusWRT MCP

AsusWRT MCP

by X1pheR
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

asuswrt_guest_lan_access

Control whether guest Wi-Fi clients can reach the LAN by setting allow_lan for a chosen band and slot on AsusWRT routers.

Instructions

Toggle LAN access for a guest Wi-Fi slot.

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": {
      "band": "<band>",
      "slot": "<slot>",
      "allow_lan": "<allow_lan>"
    },
    "name": "asuswrt_guest_lan_access"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bandYes
slotYes
confirmNo
dry_runNo
allow_lanYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It mentions 'Toggle', but the actual behavior sets allow_lan to a boolean, not a toggle. There is no disclosure of side effects, the role of confirm and dry_run parameters, or whether changes are reversible.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but insufficient for a tool with 5 parameters. It lacks structure; no separation of purpose, parameters, or usage notes.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the complexity (5 parameters, 3 required, enums, boolean flags, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain how to use the tool, what the parameters do, or what the outcome looks like.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no explanation for the 5 parameters. It does not define band, slot, allow_lan, confirm, or dry_run, nor their meanings or typical values.

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 'Toggle' and the resource 'LAN access for a guest Wi-Fi slot'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like asuswrt_guest_wifi or asuswrt_guest_networks by specifying a specific action on a specific slot.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, when to choose this over similar tools, or scenarios where it should not be used.

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