UniFi MCP Server

by enuno

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

connector_protect_get

Send a GET request to the UniFi Protect API through a console's Cloud Connector and return the raw response.

Instructions

Proxy a GET request to the Protect Application via Cloud Connector.

Forwards the request to https://api.ui.com/v1/connector/consoles/{console_id}/proxy/protect/{path} and returns the raw response.

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": {
      "console_id": "<console_id>",
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "connector_protect_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Protect API sub-path, e.g. ``v1/cameras``
`params`	No	Optional query parameters
`console_id`	Yes	UniFi console/host identifier (from list_hosts)
`controller`	No	Controller to run against (see list_controllers). Defaults to the controller chosen with select_controller, then the server default.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv0.6.4Oct 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / console_id / description

Added value: +"UniFi console/host identifier (from list_hosts)"

addedInput schema / properties / params / description
```
Added value: +"Optional query parameters"
```

addedInput schema / properties / path / description

Added value: +"Protect API sub-path, e.g. ``v1/cameras``"

removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "result": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      {
+        "items": {},
+        "type": "array"
+      }
+    ]
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "result"
+]
```
addedOutput schema / x-fastmcp-wrap-result
```
Added value: +true
```

Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0Oct 12, 2026

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."
+}

First observedv0.2.0Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that the request is forwarded to a constructed URL and that the raw response is returned, which is useful context for a proxy tool. It does not discuss authentication, error handling, or whether the response is parsed.

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?

The description is short and front-loaded: the core behavior appears in the first sentence, followed by the exact forwarding target and return behavior. There is no wasted text.

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?

Given that the input schema is fully documented and an output schema exists, the description provides enough context to understand the tool's role and behavior. The main missing detail is any note about authentication or error behavior for the proxied call.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds some meaning by showing how console_id and path compose the upstream URL, but it does not explain params or controller beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it proxies a GET request to the Protect Application via Cloud Connector. It also names the exact upstream URL pattern, which distinguishes it from the sibling connector_protect_post/patch/put/delete tools and the connector_network_* family.

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 description makes clear that this is the GET variant for Protect API proxying, which implies usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over specific Protect or integration tools, nor does it call out alternatives or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server