Skip to main content
Glama

getUrlFilterGeneral

Get the URL filter global setting, including whether URL filtering is enabled and the default action for unmatched requests.

Instructions

Get the URL filter global setting, including whether URL filtering is enabled and the default action for unmatched requests.

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": "getUrlFilterGeneral"
  }
}

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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden; it does disclose that the response carries an enabled flag and the unmatched-request default action, which is useful. It says nothing about permissions, error behavior when URL filtering is unlicensed, or the siteId defaulting behavior, leaving meaningful gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the resource and the most decision-relevant returned fields front-loaded. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description does need to characterize the return value, and it does so at a high level (enabled state, default action). For a simple two-optional-param getter this is nearly sufficient, though it omits the rest of the settings payload an agent might expect.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already fully documented, including the siteId default and listSites discovery hint. The description adds nothing about site scope or header usage, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get the URL filter global setting') and previews the returned fields, which distinguishes it implicitly as the global config rather than the rules/blacklist/whitelist siblings. It never names those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation is left to inference from the word 'global'.

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 statement of when to call this versus getUrlFilterRules, getUrlFilterBlacklist, or getUrlFilterWhitelist, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. An agent must infer usage purely from the name and the word 'global'.

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