mcfortigate

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List connected wireless clients

list_wifi_clients

Read-onlyIdempotent

List wireless clients associated on a FortiGate and resolve each MAC against DHCP and ARP data to reveal hostnames and vendor names.

Instructions

List wireless clients currently associated, enriched with DHCP and ARP.

Each client is joined against the DHCP lease and ARP tables by MAC, which is what turns an anonymous MAC into a recognizable device. The hostname comes from the DHCP lease, falling back to the vendor class identifier when the client sent no name. MAC addresses are reported in one canonical lowercase colon-separated form whatever spelling the source used, since that is what makes the join work at all.

authenticated is true or false only when the appliance said so, and absent when it did not, because inferring "not authenticated" from a missing field would fabricate a security-relevant claim.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ssid`	No	Keep only clients associated to this SSID, matched exactly. `filtered_out` reports how many clients it removed.
`vdom`	No	Virtual domain to read. Defaults to the one configured for this target. The `vdom` field in the response names the one actually read.
`limit`	No	Maximum rows to return. Defaults to 200, capped at 1000.
`offset`	No	Index to start from, for paging through a large table.
`target`	No	Which FortiGate to query. Optional when only one is configured.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), so the description carries the behavioral load and does so well: it explains the MAC-based join, the hostname fallback to vendor class identifier, MAC canonicalization, and the tri-state `authenticated` field where absence is deliberately not treated as false to avoid fabricating a security claim.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the multi-paragraph structure separates data-provenance semantics from the field-level caveat. Slightly verbose on MAC canonicalization, but every sentence carries substantive information.

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?

With an output schema present and full annotations, the description need not explain return values, and it complements them with the provenance and null-semantics an agent needs. The only real gap is guidance on when to prefer this over the DHCP-lease or ARP siblings.

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 ssid, vdom, limit, offset and target are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level format or syntax detail, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 wireless clients currently associated') and immediately qualifies the scope with the DHCP/ARP enrichment, which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like list_dhcp_leases and get_arp_table. An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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 enrichment explanation implies when this is preferable to a raw MAC listing, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement naming alternatives among the many list_* siblings. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server