omada-mcp

by falehsub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

Get live WAN link & health status

get_wan_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect gateway WAN link state, gateway/DNS/WAN IP, failover/load-balance mode, latency/packet loss health…

Instructions

Inspect gateway WAN link state, gateway/DNS/WAN IP, failover/load-balance mode, latency/packet loss health…

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_wan_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	No
`maskWanIp`	No
`includeSpeedtest`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ports`	Yes
`wanMode`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`hasGateway`	Yes
`linkUpCount`	Yes
`totalWanPorts`	Yes
`internetUpCount`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0Nov 15, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / site
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv1.2.2Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is conveyed elsewhere. The description adds the scope of returned health metrics, but omits a meaningful behavioral fact: the speedtest path is active by default, which affects call cost and latency.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the trailing ellipsis is slightly unpolished but the core information leads.

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 values need not be described, but with three parameters at 0% schema coverage and no explanation of the speedtest side effect or site scoping, the definition is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for all three parameters, so the description must carry the meaning. It names the WAN IP output (loosely relating to maskWanIp) but never explains site, maskWanIp redaction, or the includeSpeedtest default. The single-sentence format leaves parameter meaning largely undocumented for an agent.

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?

Uses a specific verb ('Inspect') with a specific resource (gateway WAN link state) and enumerates the fields surfaced: gateway/DNS/WAN IP, failover/load-balance mode, latency/packet loss. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling diagnose_wan, which an agent could easily confuse with a status read.

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?

Implied usage as a read-only status check is clear from the verb, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no reference to diagnose_wan for active troubleshooting. The agent must infer the status-vs-diagnose split from names alone.

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