omada-mcp

by falehsub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

List WLAN groups & SSID bindings

list_wlan_groups

Read-onlyIdempotent

List configured WLAN groups and their SSIDs for assigning APs cleanly.

Instructions

List configured WLAN groups and their SSIDs for assigning APs cleanly.

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_wlan_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	No

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

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds almost nothing beyond that: it doesn't say whether results are scoped to a site, how large the list can get, or what happens when no site is supplied. An output schema exists, so return format needn't be described, but the site-scoping behavior should be.

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 tight sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. The closing rationale phrase is slightly vague but costs little in length.

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?

Given low schema coverage on the only parameter and a bare description, the definition is under-specified for a tool whose main ambiguity is site scoping. The output schema relieves the need to document return values, but the missing parameter and usage guidance leave real gaps.

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?

The single parameter `site` has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it. Nothing explains whether omitting it lists across all sites or defaults to a single site, which is the one semantic an agent actually needs here. The description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 configured WLAN groups and their SSIDs." That is clear enough to distinguish the general purpose, though it never explicitly contrasts with the nearby list_wlans sibling, so the agent must infer the group-vs-SSID 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The trailing clause "for assigning APs cleanly" gestures at a use case but reads as marketing phrasing rather than an actionable condition for choosing this tool over list_wlans or list_wifi_clients.

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