UniFi Internal API MCP Server

stat_client

Fetch detailed network statistics for a specific client by MAC address to monitor performance, usage, and connection details.

Instructions

Fetch detailed statistics for a single client by MAC address.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "mac": "<mac>"
    },
    "name": "stat_client"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mac`	Yes	MAC address of the client to look up

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation, which is safe. However, it doesn't mention what happens if the MAC is not found, whether there are authentication requirements, or any rate limits. This is a minimal viable disclosure but lacks depth.

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, short sentence (10 words) with no redundant phrasing. It gets straight to the point, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The tool is simple: one required parameter, an output schema exists, and the operation is a straightforward read. The description is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool does. It lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this over similar stat tools, but given the low complexity and available output schema, it is reasonably 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 schema description for 'mac' is fully provided ('MAC address of the client to look up'), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond restating the parameter's purpose. It doesn't specify the expected format (e.g., colons, dashes) or any default behavior.

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 ('Fetch'), the resource ('detailed statistics for a single client'), and the required qualifier ('by MAC address'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_clients or stat_allusers, which either list clients or fetch statistics for all users.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies when to use this tool: when you need detailed stats for one specific client identified by MAC address. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent would understand this is for a targeted lookup, not a bulk list.

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

Deploy Server