UniFi Protect MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get user

protect_get_user

Read-only

Fetches details for a specific Protect user by ID—name, email, and account IDs—so you can identify or verify users in UniFi Protect.

Instructions

Get details for a specific Protect user by ID. Returns the same fields as protect_list_users entries: id, modelKey, name, firstName, lastName, email, ucoreUserId.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "protect_get_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	User ID

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	User ID
`name`	No	Display name
`email`	No	Email address
`lastName`	No	Last name
`modelKey`	No	Always "user"
`firstName`	No	First name
`ucoreUserId`	No	UniFi Core user UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.15.0Oct 14, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
```
Added value: +"^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{1,64}$"
```
- changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +{}
```

Changed12 schema fields changedv2.11.5Sep 13, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / email / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / email / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / firstName / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / firstName / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / lastName / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / lastName / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / modelKey / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / modelKey / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / name / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / name / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / ucoreUserId / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / ucoreUserId / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

First observedv2.7.4Jun 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

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 only the returned field list, which is largely duplicated by the output schema, and omits error or permission behavior.

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, purpose first and return fields second, with no wasted words. The field list is somewhat redundant with the output schema but remains short and scannable.

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?

Simple read-by-ID tool with full annotation coverage and an existing output schema, so the description is nearly complete for calling it correctly. The only gap is no explicit disambiguation from protect_get_ulp_user, but the core invocation needs nothing more.

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% with 'User ID' and a pattern constraint; the description adds only 'by ID', which restates the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema fully documents the single parameter.

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?

States a specific verb (Get details), resource (Protect user), and selector (by ID), plus the returned field shape. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling protect_get_ulp_user, another user-fetching tool, so sibling discrimination is left to inference.

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?

Implies usage when you have a user ID and need details for that single user, and notes field parity with protect_list_users entries. However, it never states when to prefer this over protect_list_users or protect_get_ulp_user, so guidance is only implied.

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