Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AsusWRT MCP

AsusWRT MCP

by X1pheR
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

asuswrt_radio

Enable or disable a main Wi-Fi radio band on AsusWRT routers to control network availability for 2G, 5G, 5G2, or 6G bands.

Instructions

Enable or disable a main Wi-Fi radio band.

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>",
      "enabled": "<enabled>"
    },
    "name": "asuswrt_radio"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bandYes
confirmNo
dry_runNo
enabledYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'enable or disable' without explaining side effects (e.g., whether it disconnects clients, requires admin access, or causes a restart). The confirm and dry_run parameters hint at caution but are not explained.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It could include parameter explanations without becoming verbose.

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 no output schema and 4 parameters with no descriptions, the description is highly incomplete. The agent lacks information about return values, side effects, and parameter semantics.

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%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters. The four parameters (band, enabled, confirm, dry_run) are not explained; the agent cannot infer what confirm or dry_run do.

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 tool enables or disables a main Wi-Fi radio band, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that handle guest networks, overviews, or other configurations.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like asuswrt_wireless_overview or asuswrt_guest_wifi. No context on prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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