Skip to main content
Glama
enuno

UniFi MCP Server

by enuno
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

list_integration_devices

List adopted devices via the integration API.

Instructions

List adopted devices via the integration API.

Args: site_id: Site identifier (UUID or internal reference) settings: Application settings limit: Maximum number of devices to return (1-1000) offset: Number of devices to skip

Returns: Paginated list of integration API devices

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo
site_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

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the entire burden, yet it says nothing about permissions, auth scope, rate limits, or what 'adopted' means for results. It only notes pagination. It also lists a 'settings' argument that does not exist in the schema, adding confusion rather than transparency.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The Args/Returns layout is front-loaded and reasonably compact, and the Returns line is tolerable even though an output schema already exists. But it wastes space on a nonexistent 'settings' argument and omits a real one, so structure is adequate but not clean.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-format explanation is unneeded. However, for a 4-parameter tool the description misdocuments the parameter set (phantom 'settings', missing 'controller') and gives no usage context, leaving the agent with an inaccurate picture of how to call it correctly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 25% (just 'controller'), so the description should compensate but only partially does. It adds useful detail for site_id (UUID or internal reference) and limit (1-1000), but introduces a phantom 'settings' parameter absent from the schema and completely omits the real 'controller' parameter, which the schema documents and which ties into select_controller.

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 ('List adopted devices via the integration API'), which clearly separates it from sibling read endpoints like list_integration_clients or list_integration_networks. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the closely related get_integration_device or list_integration_device_tags, so it falls short of a full 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as get_integration_device or the broader device-listing siblings. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions described; the agent must infer that this is the paginated site-scoped lister.

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