omada-mcp

by falehsub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

List WiFi clients

list_wifi_clients

Read-onlyIdempotent

List only wireless clients, same fields as list_clients.

Instructions

List only wireless clients, same fields as list_clients.

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": "list_wifi_clients"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	No
`limit`	No	Max clients (1-5000, default 500)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`items`	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

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the wireless-only filter, with nothing on pagination, result volume limits, or the openWorld implication of reaching a controller. Adds some value but modest beyond annotations.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the scope that matters. There is no wasted wording, though the terseness pushes the burden of explanation onto the reader rather than adding useful detail.

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 explained, and the annotations carry the safety profile. However, for a tool with an undocumented 'site' parameter and an openWorld read against a controller, the definition omits how site selection works and whether results are paginated across the limit.

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 coverage is only 50%: 'limit' is fully documented in the schema (1-5000, default 500), but 'site' has no description anywhere. The description says nothing about parameters and does not compensate for the undocumented site selector, leaving the agent to guess whether it takes a name, ID, or defaults to all sites.

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 ... clients') plus a scoping qualifier ('only wireless'), which distinguishes it from the sibling list_clients and implicitly from list_wired_clients. It stops short of 5 because the scope qualifier is the only differentiator and no other sibling is named.

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?

'List only wireless clients' implies the selection condition (wireless-only inventories) and references list_clients for the broader case, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement and no guidance versus search_clients or diagnose_client.

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