Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
librenms-mcp

librenms-mcp

by mhajder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Device Wireless Sensors

device_wireless_sensors
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a device's wireless sensor readings from LibreNMS, including frequency, clients, RSSI, CCQ, and rate, because these values are excluded from health and general sensor lists.

Instructions

List the wireless sensors of a device with their current values.

Wireless readings (frequency, clients, distance, rssi, ccq, rate, noise-floor, power, quality, capacity, utilization) are kept apart from the health sensors in LibreNMS, so they do not appear in health_* or sensors_list; this is the only route that returns them.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "hostname": "<hostname>"
    },
    "name": "device_wireless_sensors"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hostnameYesDevice hostname or device ID
sensor_classNoOnly this wireless sensor class, e.g. clients, rssi, frequency

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.13.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds domain behavior the annotations cannot: these readings are stored separately in LibreNMS and are unreachable through the health sensor tools. It does not discuss pagination or result size, but with an output schema present that is a minor gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the routing caveat. The parenthetical class list is long but earns its place as de facto enum guidance; nothing is redundant.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: what is returned, which classes exist, and why no other tool surfaces this data.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by listing the eleven sensor classes that the free-text sensor_class filter accepts — the schema has no enum, so this list is the only enumeration an agent gets.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource and scope: 'List the wireless sensors of a device with their current values.' It then enumerates exactly which readings count as wireless (frequency, clients, rssi, ccq, etc.), which lets an agent distinguish this tool from sensors_list without opening any 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 states when to use it ('this is the only route that returns them') and names the alternatives that will not work ('they do not appear in health_* or sensors_list'). That is a clear when/when-not with the competing tools identified.

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