Skip to main content
Glama
drmogie

Technitium MCP

by drmogie
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

technitium_settings_set

Update Technitium DNS server settings by sending only the fields to change; sensitive port, listener, recursion, or forwarder edits require explicit confirmation.

Instructions

Change server settings. Send only the settings that should change.

Example: {"enableBlocking": true}. Check names with technitium_endpoint_help on /api/settings/set. Read the settings first and tell the user what will change. Needs confirm=true after the user says yes. Port, listener, DNS over HTTPS/TLS, recursion and forwarder changes need confirm_phrase "/api/settings/set". server: which Technitium server, when this tool has several. One name only. Cluster-wide settings belong on the cluster primary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serverNo
confirmNo
settingsYes
confirm_phraseNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / server
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "title": "Server",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the two-tier confirmation gate (confirm=true vs. confirm_phrase="/api/settings/set") and the classes of settings that trigger the stronger gate. It does not discuss reversibility or failure modes, but the confirm mechanics are the risky behavior worth surfacing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core instruction, then prerequisites and per-parameter notes. The line-per-topic structure is readable and most sentences earn their place; the example inline JSON is slightly awkward but useful.

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 no explanation. For a mutation tool with an arbitrary-key nested settings object and a two-tier confirmation flow, the description covers the parts that matter. What's missing is a note on what happens to settings omitted from the payload or on partial-application semantics.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry all four parameters, and it does: 'settings' (partial, example given), 'server' (single name, cluster-wide goes to the primary), 'confirm' (after user approval), and 'confirm_phrase' (exact value for sensitive changes). It also routes the agent to endpoint_help for valid setting keys, which the open-ended schema cannot provide.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change server settings') and adds the key scoping rule ('Send only the settings that should change'), which distinguishes a partial update from a full overwrite. It implies but never names technitium_settings_get as the read counterpart, so sibling differentiation is left partly to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit prerequisites and sequencing: read current settings first, tell the user what will change, then confirm=true only after the user agrees. It also names technitium_endpoint_help as the way to discover valid setting names, and flags which specific settings require the stronger confirm_phrase. Nothing important is left for the agent to guess.

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