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

safe-omada-mcp

by gaspareduard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

getQosPolicyRule

[DEPRECATED] Get gateway QoS policy settings. This is an alias for getQosPolicy — use getQosPolicy instead.

Instructions

[DEPRECATED] Get gateway QoS policy 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": "getQosPolicyRule"
  }
}

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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses important lifecycle behavior by marking the tool deprecated and explaining that it is an alias for getQosPolicy. However, with no annotations provided, it does not explicitly confirm read-only safety, authentication requirements, rate limits, or return behavior beyond the implication of "Get."

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?

Only two sentences are used, with the deprecation warning and replacement guidance front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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 two-parameter deprecated alias with fully documented schema fields, the description gives enough information to route the agent to getQosPolicy. It does not explain return values, but since it is merely an alias, that omission is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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%, and both siteId and customHeaders are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 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 policy settings," and explicitly identifies itself as a deprecated alias for getQosPolicy. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling getQosPolicy and other QoS-related tools.

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 directs the agent to use getQosPolicy instead, leaving no ambiguity about when this tool should be selected. It effectively says the tool is legacy and should not be chosen for new work.

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