Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
omada-mcp

omada-mcp

by dfla-me
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get AP radio config

get_ap_radios
Read-only

Retrieve per-band radio configuration for an access point: channel, channel width, and transmit power for 2.4/5/6 GHz bands. Uses the AP MAC address to fetch the details.

Instructions

Per-band radio configuration for one AP: channel, channel width, Tx power and Tx-power level for 2.4/5/6 GHz. Use list_devices to find the AP MAC.

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": {
      "apMac": "<apMac>"
    },
    "name": "get_ap_radios"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apMacYesAP MAC, e.g. 'A8-29-48-C1-BB-C0'.
siteIdNoOverride the default site.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by specifying exactly what configuration fields are returned per band, enhancing transparency without contradiction.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, usage hint follows. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and provides a usage hint. It could mention output format, but given openWorldHint, it's acceptable.

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% with both parameters described. The description adds a usage hint for apMac but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states it retrieves per-band radio configuration for one AP, listing specific fields (channel, channel width, Tx power, Tx-power level) and bands (2.4/5/6 GHz). It distinguishes from siblings by referencing list_devices for finding AP MAC.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says 'Use list_devices to find the AP MAC', providing a clear prerequisite and linking to a sibling tool. It does not include when-not or alternatives, but the hint is actionable.

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