Skip to main content
Glama
gaspareduard

safe-omada-mcp

by gaspareduard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to safe-omada-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • tplink-omada-mcp

      aljopro
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server that lets AI assistants monitor and manage TP-Link Omada controllers. It provides analytics and read-only queries plus write operations such as rebooting devices, blocking clients, and changing network or firewall settings.
      84
      MIT

    • omada-mcp

      dfla-me
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to read and safely modify TP-Link Omada networks through capability-gated tools, with a default read-only profile and dry-run writes for security.
      11
      1
      MIT

    • unifi-mcp

      pproenca
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that turns Claude into a UniFi network specialist. Manage devices, optimize WiFi, audit security, and troubleshoot your network through natural language.
      31
      16 npm
      2
      MIT

    • openwisp-mcp

      marten-lucas
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for managing OpenWISP network infrastructure, enabling AI assistants to control devices, templates, topologies, and RADIUS sessions via the OpenWISP REST API.
      92
      19 npm
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 87 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes, but deprecated tools (getClient, getDevice, getRFScanResult) overlap with newer alternatives (listClients, listDevices). The large number of getSitesAps* tools are well-differentiated but could confuse agents due to their similar prefixes.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The overwhelming majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (e.g., getApDetail, listDevices). Minor inconsistencies exist: 'searchDevices' vs. 'getAllDeviceBySite', and 'diagnoseClient' could be more consistent with 'getClientDetail'. However, overall pattern is strong.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 87 tools, the surface is extremely large and likely overwhelms agents. Many highly granular tools (e.g., separate tools for each AP configuration aspect) could be consolidated. This count far exceeds typical scope for a single server, making selection difficult.

    Completeness2/5

    The tool set is heavily read-oriented, with extensive get/list operations for devices, clients, and configurations. However, it lacks create, update, or delete operations for most resources (e.g., no add/remove client, no device adoption/removal). This creates dead ends for agents attempting full lifecycle management.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive

    Resources