Skip to main content
Glama
YawLabs

@yawlabs/tailscale-mcp

by YawLabs

Batch update posture attributes

tailscale_batch_update_posture_attributes
Idempotent

Batch update custom posture attributes on multiple Tailscale devices. Set or delete values with custom: keys using JSON Merge Patch semantics.

Instructions

Batch update custom posture attributes across multiple devices. Each attribute key must start with 'custom:'. Uses JSON Merge Patch semantics — pass null as the attribute config to delete.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodesYesMap of device ID to attribute config map (e.g. { "nPM2KNuedB21DEVEL": { "custom:compliant": { "value": "true" } }, "nPpz3VEKzX11DEVEL": { "custom:compliant": { "value": false, "expiry": "2026-12-01T00:00:00Z" } } }). Keys are device IDs, nodeIds preferred. Pass null as the config to delete an attribute.
commentNoOptional comment added to the audit log explaining why attributes are being set (max 200 chars)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.21.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / nodes / description
      Previous value: -"Map of device ID to attribute config map (e.g. { \"12345\": { \"custom:compliant\": { \"value\": \"true\" } }, \"67890\": { \"custom:compliant\": { \"value\": false, \"expiry\": \"2026-12-01T00:00:00Z\" } } }). Pass null as the config to delete an attribute."New value: +"Map of device ID to attribute config map (e.g. { \"nPM2KNuedB21DEVEL\": { \"custom:compliant\": { \"value\": \"true\" } }, \"nPpz3VEKzX11DEVEL\": { \"custom:compliant\": { \"value\": false, \"expiry\": \"2026-12-01T00:00:00Z\" } } }). Keys are device IDs, nodeIds preferred. Pass null as the config to delete an attribute."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.18.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / nodes / additionalProperties / additionalProperties / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
      -  {
      -    "properties": {
      -      "expiry": {
      -        "type": "string"
      -      },
      -      "value": {
      -        "anyOf": [
      -          {
      -            "type": "string"
      -          },
      -          {
      -            "type": "number"
      -          },
      -          {
      -            "type": "boolean"
      -          }
      -        ]
      -      }
      -    },
      -    "required": [
      -      "value"
      -    ],
      -    "type": "object"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]New value: +[
      +  {
      +    "properties": {
      +      "expiry": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "value": {
      +        "type": [
      +          "string",
      +          "number",
      +          "boolean"
      +        ]
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "required": [
      +      "value"
      +    ],
      +    "type": "object"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "type": "null"
      +  }
      +]
  3. First observedv0.13.3

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

Description contradicts annotations: it explicitly states 'pass null as the attribute config to delete', a destructive operation, while annotations declare destructiveHint=false. This is a serious inconsistency that misleads agents about the tool's side effects. Per rule, score is 1 when contradiction exists.

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?

Three sentences, zero waste. Purpose is front-loaded, and the additional constraints (key prefix, merge patch, null deletion) are presented concisely. Ideal length for the tool's complexity.

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?

The description covers the essential behavioral aspects: batch scope, custom: prefix, merge patch semantics, and deletion via null. The nested schema covers parameter structure fully. However, the destructiveHint annotation conflict undermines completeness, and no mention of response format (though no output schema exists) is a minor gap. Overall, still quite complete for the complexity level.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly stating the 'custom:' key prefix requirement and clarifying JSON Merge Patch semantics, which are not fully captured in the schema's parameter descriptions. The null-deletion behavior is repeated from the schema but the additional constraint justifies a 4.

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 states a specific verb ('batch update'), resource ('custom posture attributes'), and scope ('across multiple devices'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tailscale_set_device_posture_attribute and tailscale_delete_device_posture_attribute by emphasizing batch, multi-device operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly implies use for batch updates across multiple devices. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the 'batch' wording gives clear context. No exclusions are stated, so it fits the 'clear context, no exclusions' level.

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