Skip to main content
Glama

List Firewalla Target Lists

firewalla_list_target_lists
Read-onlyIdempotent

View available block and allow target lists, including Firewalla-managed categories and user-defined custom lists, to audit network security configurations.

Instructions

List the block/allow target lists available on this MSP account — both Firewalla-managed ("global") and user-defined.

Use this to answer:

  • "Which block lists is Firewalla enforcing against?"

  • "Have I added any custom target lists, and what are their owners?"

  • "What categories (ad, tracker, malware, …) are covered?"

This endpoint returns summaries (including target count per list); call firewalla_get_target_list for the actual targets array.

Args:

  • owner (string, optional): Filter by owner (e.g. 'global').

  • response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): Output format (default: markdown).

Returns: { count: number, // number of target lists targetLists: Array<{ id: string, name: string, owner: string, // "global" | user id type?: string, // e.g. "ad", "tracker", "malware", "custom" source?: string, // upstream feed source (Firewalla-managed lists) count?: number, // number of entries in the list blockMode?: string, // e.g. "dns" | "ip" beta?: boolean, notes?: string, lastUpdated?: number }> }

Audit framing:

  • Custom lists (owner != global) without notes → undocumented intent.

  • blockMode=dns only, but target includes raw IPs → mismatch, investigate.

  • Zero-count list → may be stale / never populated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ownerNoFilter by owner. Common values: 'global' (Firewalla-managed), or a specific user id. Omit to list all.
response_formatNoOutput format. 'markdown' (default) renders human-readable audit tables. 'json' returns structured data suitable for chaining into another tool call.markdown
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable context beyond this: it explains the distinction between summaries vs. detailed targets, provides audit framing guidance (e.g., 'Custom lists without notes → undocumented intent'), and mentions output format implications. While it doesn't cover rate limits or authentication needs, it adds significant behavioral context beyond the 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?

The description is efficiently structured: it starts with the core purpose, provides usage examples in bullet points, explains the relationship with a sibling tool, documents parameters and returns, and ends with audit framing. Every sentence serves a clear purpose with zero waste, and information is front-loaded appropriately.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), and 100% schema coverage, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, usage guidelines, relationship with siblings, parameter semantics (though schema covers this), return structure, and even includes audit framing for interpretation. No output schema exists, but the description thoroughly documents the return format.

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 the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it mentions the 'owner' filter can be used to list all (implied by omission) and provides example values, but doesn't add substantial semantic context. This meets the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('block/allow target lists available on this MSP account'), specifying both Firewalla-managed ('global') and user-defined lists. It distinguishes this tool from its sibling 'firewalla_get_target_list' by noting that this returns summaries while the sibling provides the actual targets array.

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 explicitly provides three example questions this tool can answer, giving clear context for when to use it. It also distinguishes from the sibling 'firewalla_get_target_list' by stating this returns summaries while that tool provides the actual targets array, offering explicit guidance on alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/productengineered/firewalla-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server