UniFi Network MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

unifi_list_switch_stacks

Read-only

List switch stacks at a site to identify groups of physical switches managed as one logical unit. Returns stack details including member units and LAGs.

Instructions

List Switch Stacks (multiple physical switches managed as one logical unit) at a site. Returns: id, deviceId (the stack's primary device), name, units[] (the stacked switches — named members on consoles older than 10.6.106), lags[] (LAGs spanning the stack), metadata.origin. Per-unit schema is not rendered in the 10.6.106 docs — call unifi_get_switch_stack to inspect. Use for: identifying stacked switches; individual member configs/stats still come from unifi_get_device.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of records to return (default: 25, max: 200)
`filter`	No	Filter expression
`offset`	No	Number of records to skip (default: 0)
`siteId`	Yes	Site ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv2.13.0Sep 20, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
```
Previous value: -1New value: +0
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / data / items / properties / deviceId
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / data / items / properties / units
```
Added value: +{
+  "items": {},
+  "type": "array"
+}
```
First observedv2.8.0Jun 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds value by documenting the returned fields, the version-dependent naming difference (units vs members), and the caveat that per-unit schema is not rendered in 10.6.106 docs.

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 front-loaded with the core definition and scope, then efficiently covers return fields, a version-specific caveat, and sibling tool routing. No sentence is filler, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

The description provides return-field expectations, version-specific naming behavior, a schema-rendering caveat, and explicit routing to related tools. Combined with the annotations and output schema, it gives an agent everything needed to select and invoke this 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 documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable and matches the baseline for fully covered schema parameters.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List Switch Stacks') with an explicit scope ('at a site') and a parenthetical definition of what a switch stack is. It also distinguishes this list operation from unifi_get_switch_stack by noting that per-unit inspection requires that sibling tool.

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?

The description gives a clear 'Use for' statement and explicitly routes to alternatives: unifi_get_switch_stack for per-unit schema inspection and unifi_get_device for individual member configs/stats. This provides actionable selection guidance without ambiguity.

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

Deploy Server