Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
enuno

UniFi MCP Server

by enuno
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_site_health_summary

Retrieve a health summary for all UniFi sites or a specific site to monitor network status and identify issues quickly.

Instructions

Get health summary for all sites or a specific site.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_idNoOptional site identifier. If None, returns summary for all sites.
controllerNoController to run against (see list_controllers). Defaults to the controller chosen with select_controller, then the server default.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / site_id / description
      Added value: +"Optional site identifier. If None, returns summary for all sites."
  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

B3.1/5.0
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 burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation via "Get" but does not state whether it is read-only, what permissions are required, or what kind of health data is summarized; the output schema helps with return values, but behavioral context is largely absent.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the core operation and the two scopes immediately.

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?

The tool is low complexity, all parameters are optional and fully documented in the schema, and an output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. However, with no annotations and many overlapping sibling tools, the definition is missing useful behavioral and usage context that would help an agent select it correctly.

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%, and the schema already explains that site_id is optional and defaults to all sites, and that controller defaults through select_controller. The description only restates the all-sites vs specific-site behavior already covered by the schema, adding no extra parameter semantics.

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 and resource: "Get health summary" for all sites or a specific site. This is clear enough to understand the tool's basic function, but it does not distinguish it from sibling tools like health_check, get_site_details, or get_internet_health.

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 says the tool works for all sites or a specific site, but that is parameter scoping rather than when-to-use guidance. It provides no indication of when to choose this tool over health_check or other site-health-related siblings.

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