Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unraid MCP

Unraid MCP

by lemanjo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Unraid API getApiKeyCreationFormSchema

unraid_v4371_query_api_key_creation_form_schema
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the API key creation form schema to see required fields and validation rules for creating new keys, with current values intentionally omitted.

Instructions

Get the API-key form schemas; current form values are deliberately excluded.

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": "unraid_v4371_query_api_key_creation_form_schema"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is established. The description adds a valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: current form values are deliberately excluded, preventing an agent from expecting prefilled data. This is consistent with the read-only, non-destructive nature of the 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?

The description is a single compact sentence that front-loads the operation and then adds one clarifying limitation. Every word contributes useful meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a zero-parameter, read-only query with rich annotations, the description is complete enough. It clearly states what the tool returns and explicitly notes the exclusion of current form values, so an agent can invoke it without additional context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema is empty, with zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage. There is no parameter semantics for the description to add, and the 0-parameter baseline of 4 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get the API-key form schemas.' It also adds a distinguishing detail by noting that current form values are deliberately excluded, which differentiates it from sibling tools that query actual API keys or permission metadata.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like query_api_keys or query_api_key_possible_roles. The intended use is implied from the name and the phrase 'form schemas,' but the description does not provide clear routing or exclusions.

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