Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
safe-omada-mcp

safe-omada-mcp

by gaspareduard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

getQosMarkingRule

[DEPRECATED] Get gateway QoS marking (tag outbound traffic) settings. This is an alias for getQosPolicy — use getQosPolicy instead.

Instructions

[DEPRECATED] Get gateway QoS marking (tag outbound traffic) settings. This is an alias for getQosPolicy — use getQosPolicy instead.

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": "getQosMarkingRule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteIdNoSite ID to target. If omitted, uses the default site from OMADA_SITE_ID config. Use listSites to discover available site IDs.
customHeadersNoOptional 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.

  1. Addedv0.18.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the critical behavioral fact — this is a deprecated alias of getQosPolicy — and the name implies a read-only getter. It does not state whether the output is identical to getQosPolicy or note any rate/permission behavior, which leaves a small gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, deprecation flag first, purpose second, alternative last. Nothing redundant and every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-required-parameter read tool with fully documented schema and no output schema, the description supplies the key facts an agent needs: what it returns conceptually and that it is superseded. Only the question of output parity with getQosPolicy is left unaddressed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with siteId and customHeaders fully documented in the schema (including the OMADA_SITE_ID fallback and listSites hint). The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get gateway QoS marking settings') with a parenthetical clarifying what QoS marking means (tag outbound traffic). It also explicitly identifies itself as an alias for getQosPolicy, so an agent can distinguish it from the many other QoS siblings without reading the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says to use getQosPolicy instead, giving both the when-not (this tool) and the alternative. The DEPRECATED prefix front-loads the routing decision.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools