Skip to main content
Glama
UniFi MCP Server

UniFi MCP Server

get_integration_wifi_broadcast

Retrieve details for a specific WiFi broadcast using its site and broadcast ID through the integration API.

Instructions

Get a single WiFi broadcast via the integration API.

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>",
      "broadcast_id": "<broadcast_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_integration_wifi_broadcast"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_idYesSite identifier
controllerNoController to run against (see list_controllers). Defaults to the controller chosen with select_controller, then the server default.
broadcast_idYesWiFi broadcast UUID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.6.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / broadcast_id / description
      Added value: +"WiFi broadcast UUID"
    • addedInput schema / properties / site_id / description
      Added value: +"Site identifier"
  2. 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."
      +}
  3. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only fetch via 'Get' but does not state authentication requirements, error behavior, or that it fails if the broadcast is missing. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification for a tool with no annotations.

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, and the input schema is fully documented. However, with no annotations and no additional behavioral context, the description is only minimally adequate for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in all cases.

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 schema already documents site_id, broadcast_id, and the controller fallback logic. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb (Get) and resource (WiFi broadcast) with scope (single), which implicitly distinguishes it from the plural list sibling. It does not explicitly name list_integration_wifi_broadcasts as the alternative, but an agent can infer the distinction.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The singular 'single' lightly implies it is for fetching one known broadcast, but that is left to inference.

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