Skip to main content
Glama
amittell

firewalla-mcp-server

by amittell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_offline_devices

Read-only

List offline devices from a Firewalla network, sorted by last seen. Filter by box or limit results to identify disconnected devices.

Instructions

List offline devices from the full device list (GET /v2/devices), most recently seen first by default, up to limit; total_offline_devices counts all of them. Scoped to box, else FIREWALLA_BOX_ID, else every box.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boxNoFilter devices under a specific Firewalla box
limitNoMaximum number of offline devices to return
response_formatNoResponse format. 'json' (default): the compact JSON response. 'markdown': the same response as readable markdown, its fields as bullet lists and each list of records as a table of up to 8 columns and DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE rows (default 100), ending with a line that says what the view leaves out. Omitted or null: 'json'. Errors are JSON either way.json
sort_by_last_seenNoSort devices by last seen time (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
      Previous value: -500New value: +1000
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_format
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "json",
+  "description": "Response format. 'json' (default): the compact JSON response. 'markdown': the same response as readable markdown, its fields as bullet lists and each list of records as a table of up to 8 columns and DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE rows (default 100), ending with a line that says what the view leaves out. Omitted or null: 'json'. Errors are JSON either way.",
+  "enum": [
+    "json",
+    "markdown",
+    null
+  ],
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real context beyond them: default ordering ('most recently seen first by default'), the underlying endpoint, the scope fallback chain, and the meaning of the total_offline_devices counter. It stops short of describing pagination or error behavior.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and scope fallback, with no filler. The semicolon-packed second clause is slightly dense but every element carries 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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers scope resolution, default ordering, the limit bound, and the total-count semantics. Only return-shape and pagination details are left unstated, which is minor given the readOnly annotation.

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%, so the schema itself documents box, limit, sort_by_last_seen and response_format, establishing a baseline of 3. The description reinforces the default sort direction and the scope precedence for 'box', but adds no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema already supplies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List offline devices') and grounds it in the source endpoint 'GET /v2/devices', which is enough for an agent to grasp what it returns. It does not distinguish itself from the closely related sibling search_devices, so the agent has no in-description cue for why it would pick this over a general device search.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and the scope-resolution note ('Scoped to box, else FIREWALLA_BOX_ID, else every box'), which is genuinely useful routing context. However there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus search_devices or get_device_status.

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