Skip to main content
Glama
owine

UniFi Network MCP Server

by owine
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List RADIUS profiles

unifi_list_radius_profiles
Read-only

List RADIUS profiles to view authentication/accounting server configurations for WPA-Enterprise WiFi, 802.1X switch ports, and VPNs, returning IDs, names, and metadata.

Instructions

List RADIUS profiles (auth/accounting server configurations referenced by WiFi WPA-Enterprise, switch 802.1X port auth, VPN). Returns: id, name, metadata (origin, configurable).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of records to return (API default: 25)
filterNoFilter expression, e.g. name.eq('Default')
offsetNoNumber of records to skip
siteIdYesSite ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
countNo
limitNo
offsetNo
totalCountNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv2.15.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / filter / description
      Previous value: -"Filter expression"New value: +"Filter expression, e.g. name.eq('Default')"
    • 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"
    • addedInput schema / properties / siteId / pattern
      Added value: +"^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{1,64}$"
    • changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -falseNew value: +{}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / data / items / properties / metadata / properties / configurable
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.13.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
      Previous value: -1New value: +0
  3. First observedv2.8.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
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 domain context but no additional behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or permission requirements; the listed return fields are already provided by the output 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?

The description is two tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no redundant phrasing. Every clause earns its place by naming the tool's function and domain context.

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?

With a full input schema, an output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description needs only to clarify the resource's purpose. It does so adequately, leaving no critical gap for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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%, so all four parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is the baseline expectation when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List RADIUS profiles') and clarifies what RADIUS profiles are with concrete examples (WiFi WPA-Enterprise, switch 802.1X port auth, VPN). It does not explicitly contrast with any sibling tool, so it falls short of the 5 bar for sibling differentiation.

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?

The description implies when the tool is useful by explaining what RADIUS profiles are referenced by, but it never states when to choose this tool over alternatives or any prerequisites. Usage is left to inference from the domain context.

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