tplink-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_wps

Retrieves the current WPS global state (on/off) from a TP-Link router to check whether Wi-Fi Protected Setup is enabled.

Instructions

WPS global state ({wps: on/off}).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_wps"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about being a safe read-only operation, latency, or router-side side effects. The "{wps: on/off}" fragment is a small hint at the return shape, but that is already captured by the output schema.

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?

A single terse fragment with no wasted words and the key concept front-loaded. It is arguably too compressed, reading as a bare field label rather than a sentence to guide an agent.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The existence of an output schema means return values need not be explained, and the tool is a trivial no-arg read. However, with zero annotations the description should at least state that this is a non-mutating read, which it does not.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema already conveys. Baseline 4 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"WPS global state" names the resource but not a verb; the agent must infer from the tool name that this reads rather than writes WPS state. The sibling set_wps is the natural complement, and the parenthetical hints at the returned shape, but the purpose is only implied.

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 statement of when to use this versus set_wps or get_wireless_advanced. The agent must infer from the get_/set_ naming convention alone that this is the read counterpart to set_wps.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.