Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
pihole-mcp

pihole-mcp

by chris2ao
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

update_adlist

Modify a Pi-hole adlist's comment, groups, or enabled status, then run update_gravity to apply the changes.

Instructions

Change an adlist's comment, groups, or enabled state. Run update_gravity to apply.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "update_adlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupsNo
addressYes
commentNo
enabledNo
list_typeNoblock

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one important trait: edits are not live until update_gravity runs. It says nothing about permissions, whether null fields mean 'leave unchanged', reversibility, or partial-update behavior, which are material for a mutation tool.

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 tight sentences, action first and the apply-step second, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with zero annotation coverage and zero schema description coverage the description leaves real gaps: list_type behavior, null-as-no-change semantics, and permission requirements. It is adequate but incomplete for a 5-parameter mutation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It names only three of five parameters (comment, groups, enabled) and silently omits list_type (block/allow enum) and address; the critical null-means-unchanged semantics for every optional parameter are never stated.

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?

Names a specific verb (change/update) and resource (adlist) plus the three mutable fields, which cleanly separates it from add_adlist, remove_adlist, and list_adlists. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 sentence 'Run update_gravity to apply' gives a genuine follow-up sequencing rule, which is useful context for when to use this tool. It offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison to add_adlist/remove_adlist, so usage is only implied via the sibling names.

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