Skip to main content
Glama
AIops-tools

fabric-aiops

config_template_drift

Identify drifted settings from a config template across bound networks, comparing expected vs actual values to show non-compliant configurations.

Instructions

[READ] For networks bound to a config template, list drifted settings.

Compares each network bound to the template against the template's settings
by exact value and reports expected-vs-actual for every drifted key. Pure
analysis over injected data — no live pull.

Args:
    template: {id, name, settings:{key: value}} — the config template.
    networks: rows {networkId, name, boundTemplateId, settings:{key: value}};
        only those whose boundTemplateId matches template['id'] are checked.
    limit: Max rows in the drifted list (default 100). The result carries
        'returned'/'limit'/'truncated'; re-run with a higher limit when
        'truncated' is true rather than treating the list as complete.

Returns dict: {templateId, templateName, boundNetworks, driftedCount,
    compliantCount, settingsChecked, driftedNetworks:[{networkId, name,
    deviations:[{setting, expected, actual}]}], returned, limit, truncated,
    note}.

Example: config_template_drift(
    template={"id":"T1","name":"branch","settings":{"timezone":"UTC"}},
    networks=[{"networkId":"N1","boundTemplateId":"T1",
               "settings":{"timezone":"PST"}}]).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
networksYes
templateYes
Behavior4/5

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

The description states the tool is read-only ('[READ]'), purely analytical, and does not perform live pulls. It explains the truncation behavior and that only networks with matching 'boundTemplateId' are checked. Without annotations, this provides sufficient transparency.

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 well-organized with an Args section and a full return dictionary. It is informative but not overly verbose, though some sentences could be streamlined. The structure aids readability.

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?

Given no output schema, the description includes a complete return structure. It covers all necessary aspects: intended use, parameters, behavior with limit and truncation, and expected output. The example further illustrates usage.

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 must add meaning. It details each parameter: 'template' (structure with id, name, settings), 'networks' (rows with specific fields), and 'limit' (default behavior and truncation handling). This significantly enhances understanding beyond the raw schema.

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 it's a READ tool that lists drifted settings for networks bound to a config template. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('config template'), and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on drift analysis.

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 specifies the context ('networks bound to a config template') and emphasizes it's a pure analysis with no live pull. It provides guidance on handling the 'limit' parameter and the 'truncated' flag, but does not explicitly mention alternatives among siblings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AIops-tools/Fabric-AIops'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server