Skip to main content
Glama
owine

UniFi Network MCP Server

by owine
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

unifi_get_acl_rule

Read-only

Fetch a specific ACL rule by its ID to inspect the complete match criteria and action.

Instructions

Get a specific ACL rule by ID (full match criteria and action).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteIdYesSite ID
aclRuleIdYesACL rule ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameNo
typeNo
indexNo
actionNo
enabledNo
metadataNo
descriptionNo
sourceFilterNo
protocolFilterNo
destinationFilterNo
enforcingDeviceFilterNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.13.0
    • addedOutput schema / properties / index
      Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Addedv2.10.0
  3. Removedv2.9.0
  4. First observedv2.8.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that the response includes the full match criteria and action, which tells the agent this is not just a summary fetch. No contradictions with annotations.

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 compact sentence leads with the verb and resource, with the clarifying parenthetical adding value without redundancy. Every part earns its place.

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 simple get-by-ID tool, the description, 100% schema coverage, read-only annotations, and existing output schema provide everything needed for correct invocation. No significant contextual gaps remain.

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% and both parameters have descriptive names plus 'Site ID' and 'ACL rule ID' descriptions. The description's 'by ID' maps to aclRuleId but adds no format, constraints, or relationship beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific ACL rule by ID', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. The parenthetical '(full match criteria and action)' signals that this returns detailed rule content, distinguishing it from sibling tools like unifi_list_acl_rules and unifi_get_acl_rule_ordering.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'specific ACL rule by ID' clearly implies this tool is for retrieving one known rule, not listing or reordering. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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