UniFi Network MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List DPI applications

unifi_list_dpi_applications

Read-only

List individual UniFi DPI applications, including Netflix, Zoom, and Steam, to get each app's numeric ID and name for granular traffic policy targeting.

Instructions

List individual DPI applications (global) — specific apps/services like 'Netflix', 'Zoom', 'Steam'. Returns: id (numeric), name. More granular than unifi_list_dpi_categories.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of records to return (API default: 25)
`filter`	No	Filter expression, e.g. name.like('Net*') or id.eq(3). NOTE: totalCount ignores the filter here — page by count
`offset`	No	Number of records to skip

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`count`	No
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`totalCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv2.15.0Oct 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / filter / description

Previous value: -"Filter expression"New value: +"Filter expression, e.g. name.like('Net*') or id.eq(3). NOTE: totalCount ignores the filter here — page by count"

changedInput schema / properties / limit / description

Previous value: -"Number of records to return (default: 25, max: 200)"New value: +"Number of records to return (API default: 25)"

changedInput schema / properties / offset / description

Previous value: -"Number of records to skip (default: 0)"New value: +"Number of records to skip"

changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +{}
```

Changed1 schema field changedv2.13.0Sep 20, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
```
Previous value: -1New value: +0
```
First observedv2.8.0Jun 30, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the '(global)' scope and the id/name return shape, but says nothing about pagination behavior or the filter-totalCount caveat that lives only in the schema.

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?

Two tight sentences plus a return fragment, with the scope and sibling differentiation front-loaded. Every clause carries information and there is 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and annotations carry the safety profile; the description still names the id/name fields for quick orientation. Complete enough for a zero-required-param list tool, though the filter/pagination interplay could have been surfaced here.

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 all three parameters (limit, filter, offset) are documented in the schema, including the important note that totalCount ignores the filter. The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline 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 (list DPI applications) and pins down the scope as global with concrete examples ('Netflix', 'Zoom', 'Steam'). It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling unifi_list_dpi_categories, so the agent can pick correctly without opening either schema.

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?

'More granular than unifi_list_dpi_categories' gives a clear comparative cue about when to prefer this tool over its sibling. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the granularity framing is enough for correct routing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server