tplink-mcp

by axo4xo

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

set_guest_network

Enable or disable a TP-Link router's guest network on a chosen band so AI agents can control guest Wi-Fi access.

Instructions

Turn a band's guest network on or off.

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": "set_guest_network"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`band`	Yes
`enabled`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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 behavioral burden. It identifies this as a toggle operation, but it does not disclose permission requirements, side effects, failure modes, or whether enabling/disabling affects existing clients.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Its brevity is appropriate for the operation, even though it leaves gaps elsewhere.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a mutation with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is too thin: it omits supported band values, side effects, and any usage context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies that 'band' selects the network band and 'enabled' is a boolean on/off switch, but it does not specify valid band values or clarify what bands are supported.

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?

The description states a specific verb-resource pair: turning a band's guest network on or off. It is distinguishable from the read-oriented sibling get_guest_network, though it does not explicitly name siblings or clarify how it differs from set_wifi_band.

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 implies the tool is a mutation for guest-network state, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not mention checking current state with get_guest_network or how this relates to other wireless setters.

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