UniFi Internal API MCP Server

list_active_clients

Retrieve active clients from your UniFi network with optional traffic usage and device filters.

Instructions

List active clients using the v2 API with optional traffic and device filters.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_active_clients"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`include_traffic_usage`	No	Include traffic usage statistics for each client
`include_unifi_devices`	No	Include UniFi devices in the results

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the API version and optional filters, but does not state that the operation is read-only, whether permissions are needed, what counts as 'active', or any rate limits/pagination behavior. The verb 'List' implicitly suggests a read operation, but this is insufficient for full transparency.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and resource. There is no redundant phrasing, and every clause adds useful information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple, has an output schema, and the core purpose is clear. However, the description leaves gaps: it does not define 'active' clients, does not explain how this relates to similar list tools, and does not mention what the response contains beyond the output schema. These gaps are moderate given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both boolean parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'traffic and device filters' is a high-level summary that adds no new detail beyond the schema's parameter meanings.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('active clients'), and the optional filter dimensions. The 'active' qualifier distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_clients and list_clients_history, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 description implies usage for retrieving active clients, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_clients or stat_client. No exclusions or comparison guidance is provided, so the usage context is only partially clear.

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

Deploy Server