UniFi Internal API MCP Server

stat_allusers

Get all wired and wireless users seen within a defined time window by specifying history hours to look back.

Instructions

Fetch all users (wired and wireless) seen within the specified time window.

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": "stat_allusers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`historyhours`	No	Hours to look back (default 8760 = 1 year)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the read-only nature via 'Fetch' and the scope (wired/wireless, time window), but lacks details on whether users are unique, pagination behavior, or query limits. The existence of an output schema covers return format, but deeper behavioral nuance is missing.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential information without any filler or repetition. Every word adds value.

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 the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description adequately covers purpose and scope. However, it does not provide guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools, and lacks exclusionary context, so it is not fully complete.

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 single parameter historyhours is fully documented in the schema with its default and explanation. The description's 'specified time window' aligns with this parameter but does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Fetch') + resource ('all users') + scope ('wired and wireless', 'within the specified time window'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_users (likely static) and stat_client (single user).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use instructions or alternative tool mentions. It implies a time-window-based query but does not compare with siblings such as list_active_clients or list_clients_history. The user must infer when this is the right choice.

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

Deploy Server