safe-omada-mcp

getDashboardSwitchSummary

Retrieve switch summary for a site dashboard: total switches, ports, active ports, PoE budget used/available, and aggregate bandwidth.

Instructions

Get switch summary for a site dashboard: total switch count, total ports, active ports, PoE budget used vs available, and aggregate bandwidth.

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": "getDashboardSwitchSummary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`siteId`	No	Site ID to target. If omitted, uses the default site from OMADA_SITE_ID config. Use listSites to discover available site IDs.
`customHeaders`	No	Optional HTTP headers to include in the Omada API request (e.g. {"X-Custom-Header": "value"}). Rarely needed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.17.0Jun 19, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention that the operation is read-only, whether authentication is required, or how errors (e.g., missing site) are handled. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity for the agent.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and its key output metrics. No extraneous words, making it concise and easy to parse.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify the return format and structure. It lists metrics but doesn't indicate whether they are returned as individual fields or aggregated. Missing details on error handling, pagination, or performance implications for the agent.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Both parameters (siteId, customHeaders) are fully described in the input schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a switch summary for a site dashboard and lists specific metrics (switch count, ports, PoE budget, bandwidth). This distinguishes it from other dashboard tools like getDashboardPoEUsage, though it could more explicitly contrast with siblings.

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?

The description implies usage for getting a site's switch summary but offers no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like getDashboardMostActiveSwitches or getDashboardOverview. No exclusion criteria or preconditions mentioned.

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

Deploy Server