Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
endpoint-aiops-mcp

endpoint-aiops-mcp

by AIops-tools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

endpoint_assign_profile

Destructive

Assign a configuration profile to an endpoint with reversible change tracking that captures the prior profile for undo and audit. Use dry run to preview which profile would be replaced.

Instructions

[WRITE][risk=high] Assign a config profile to an endpoint (reversible).

Captures the prior profile before switching, so the harness records an undo (reassign the prior profile) and a faithful audit trail. Pass dry_run=True to preview: it resolves the same path and reads the same before-state as the real call, so it reports the profile that would actually be replaced and refuses on the same grounds the write would.

Args: endpoint_id: Endpoint id as returned by endpoint_list. profile_id: Config profile to assign. dry_run: If True, preview without assigning. target: Endpoint-management target name from config; omit for the default.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNo
dry_runNo
profile_idYes
endpoint_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Dry Run",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=true; the description adds substantial extra context the annotations cannot carry: it discloses that the prior profile is captured before switching, that an undo record and audit trail are produced, and exactly how dry_run differs from the real call. This is well beyond the structured hints.

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 write/risk tag and the one-line purpose are front-loaded, the behavior paragraph follows, and the Args block closes it. Every sentence earns its place and none restates schema or annotation content verbatim.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a high-risk write tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing pieces an agent needs: reversibility, the automatic undo/audit behavior, and precise dry-run semantics. Nothing required to invoke it correctly is absent.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it documents all four parameters, including the useful cross-reference that endpoint_id comes from endpoint_list and that target may be omitted for the default. The explanations are brief (e.g. profile_id is just 'Config profile to assign'), leaving a little room for richer semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Assign a config profile to an endpoint') and immediately qualifies the operation with [WRITE][risk=high] and '(reversible)'. An agent can distinguish this mutation from read siblings like endpoint_get or endpoint_list 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It gives concrete guidance on the preview path (dry_run=True resolves the same path, reads the same before-state, refuses on the same grounds) and explains the undo relationship, which frames when to use this versus just writing. It does not, however, name an explicit alternative tool or state when NOT to use this call.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools