Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tplink-mcp

tplink-mcp

by axo4xo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

wifi_info

Retrieve Wi-Fi SSID, security type, and per-band on/off status from a TP-Link router; passwords stay hidden unless reveal_secrets is enabled.

Instructions

SSID, security and on/off state per band. Passwords redacted unless reveal_secrets=True.

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": "wifi_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reveal_secretsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does deliver the key behavioral fact: credentials are redacted by default and only exposed via reveal_secrets=True. It omits whether this is strictly read-only, whether revealing secrets requires elevated auth, or logging/audit implications of doing so.

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?

Two compact sentences, zero filler, with the returned fields stated first and the security caveat immediately after. Nothing could be removed without losing 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed, and the description covers the one non-obvious param plus the redaction behavior. What's missing is sibling disambiguation and any note on privilege requirements for revealing secrets.

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 0% (the boolean has no description), so the description is the only place the parameter's semantics are explained — it clarifies the default redaction behavior and what the flag unlocks. It could go further on risks of setting it true, but it adds genuine meaning the schema lacks.

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 names the resource and the returned content precisely (SSID, security, on/off state per band), making the read intent clear. It does not distinguish itself from adjacent read tools such as get_wifi_radio, get_wireless_advanced, or get_wps, which are plausibly overlapping.

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 the many sibling read tools (get_wifi_radio, get_wireless_advanced, get_wps) or when to set reveal_secrets=True. Usage is only implied by the tool name and output fields.

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