Skip to main content
Glama
aljopro

tplink-omada-mcp

by aljopro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

getApSnmpConfig

Retrieve SNMP settings for an access point: version, community strings, trap settings, enabled state. Audits SNMP monitoring on wireless infrastructure.

Instructions

Get SNMP configuration for an access point. Returns SNMP version, community strings, trap settings, and enabled state. Useful for auditing SNMP-based monitoring configurations on wireless infrastructure.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apMacYesMAC address of the access point (e.g. "AA-BB-CC-DD-EE-FF"). Use listDevices to find AP MACs.
siteIdNoSite ID to target. If omitted, uses the default site from OMADA_SITE_ID config. Use listSites to discover available site IDs.
customHeadersNoOptional HTTP headers to include in the Omada API request (e.g. {"X-Custom-Header": "value"}). Rarely needed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.15.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It implies a non-destructive read operation but does not explicitly state read-only status, auth requirements, or potential side effects. The listed return fields provide some transparency.

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 very concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and provide immediate value. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

For a simple query tool, the description adequately explains what the tool returns and its purpose. No output schema is present, but the description compensates by listing return fields. Could be improved by noting required permissions or rate limits.

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%, and the description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('SNMP configuration for an access point'), and lists what is returned. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like getApDetail or getApGeneralConfig, which limits differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides a use case ('auditing SNMP-based monitoring configurations') but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention when not to use it.

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