Skip to main content
Glama
enuno

UniFi MCP Server

by enuno
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

connector_network_delete

Proxy a DELETE request to the Network Application via Cloud Connector.

Instructions

Proxy a DELETE request to the Network Application via Cloud Connector.

Args: console_id: UniFi console/host identifier path: Network API sub-path settings: Application settings confirm: Must be True to execute dry_run: Preview without sending

Returns: Raw response or dry-run preview

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
confirmNo
dry_runNo
console_idYes
controllerNoController to run against (see list_controllers). Defaults to the controller chosen with select_controller, then the server default.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / controller
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Controller to run against (see list_controllers). Defaults to the controller chosen with select_controller, then the server default."
+}
  2. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add useful behavioral context: 'confirm' must be True to execute and 'dry_run' previews without sending. However, it doesn't disclose the destructive nature of DELETE, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens on failure.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and uses a structured Args/Returns format. It's appropriately sized with no wasted sentences, though the Args section could be slightly more informative.

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?

Given the tool is a destructive DELETE operation with 5 parameters, no annotations, and only 20% schema coverage, the description is functional but incomplete. It doesn't explain the destructive implications, safety requirements, or the controller parameter. However, the output schema exists, so return values needn't be fully explained.

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?

The schema has only 20% description coverage, so the description must compensate. The Args section covers 5 parameters including 'console_id' and 'path', but the 'controller' parameter is documented only in the schema, not the description. The description adds meaning for most parameters but misses one.

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+resource: a DELETE request proxied to the Network Application via Cloud Connector. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like connector_network_post/put/patch/get, so it earns a 4 rather than a 3.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The 'confirm' and 'dry_run' semantics are listed in Args but the description never explains when a caller should use dry_run.

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