FortiManager MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

search_devices

Search managed FortiManager devices by name, platform, OS version, or connection status to find matching devices for provisioning and troubleshooting.

Instructions

Search for devices with filters.

Args: adom: ADOM name (default: from DEFAULT_ADOM env var, or "root") name_filter: Filter by device name (partial match) platform_filter: Filter by platform type (e.g., "FortiGate-VM") os_version_filter: Filter by OS version as major[.minor[.patch]] (e.g., "7", "7.4" or "7.4.12"; a leading "v" is accepted) connection_status: Filter by status ("up" or "down")

Returns: dict: Search results with keys: - status: "success" or "error" - count: Number of matching devices - devices: List of matching device objects - message: Error message if failed

Example: >>> # Find all FortiGate VMs >>> result = await search_devices(platform_filter="FortiGate-VM")

>>> # Find offline devices
>>> result = await search_devices(connection_status="down")

>>> # Find devices by name pattern
>>> result = await search_devices(name_filter="Branch")

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`adom`	No
`name_filter`	No
`platform_filter`	No
`connection_status`	No
`os_version_filter`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides useful return structure and error behavior, but does not state read-only status, permission requirements, pagination, or result limits. It gives adequate but incomplete behavioral context for a search operation.

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?

The description is structured with Args, Returns, and Example sections and is front-loaded with purpose. The examples and return details are useful, though slightly more verbose than strictly necessary.

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?

Given five optional parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it documents all inputs, defaults, return keys, and examples. It could more fully describe when to choose this tool over sibling device-listing tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It defines every parameter, including the ADOM default behavior, partial-match semantics for name_filter, platform examples, accepted OS version formats, and allowed connection_status values.

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 clearly states it searches devices with filters, providing a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling list_devices tool, so the purpose is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

Usage is implied through filter examples such as finding FortiGate VMs or offline devices, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus list_devices or other sibling tools.

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

Deploy Server