Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Illumio MCP Server

Illumio MCP Server

by alexgoller
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

create-iplist

Create an IP List in the Illumio PCE from IP ranges, FQDNs, or both to group addresses for security policy. This write operation requires at least one entry and pauses for user approval.

Instructions

Create an IP List from IP ranges, FQDNs (api.example.com, *.example.com), or both. At least one entry is required. WRITE OPERATION: changes PCE state. In clients that gate tool calls (Claude Desktop, Claude Code), this pauses for the user to approve it -- the call has not failed and must not be retried while waiting.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create-iplist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fqdnNoDeprecated alias for a single fqdns entry; use fqdns.
nameYesName of the IP List
fqdnsNoFQDN entries, e.g. ["*.example.com", {"fqdn": "api.example.com", "description": "vendor API"}]. An IP list can be FQDN-only; ip_ranges is then optional.
ip_rangesNoList of IP ranges to include
descriptionNoDescription of the IP List

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.13.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / fqdn / description
      Previous value: -"Fully Qualified Domain Name (optional)"New value: +"Deprecated alias for a single fqdns entry; use fqdns."
    • addedInput schema / properties / fqdns
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "FQDN entries, e.g. [\"*.example.com\", {\"fqdn\": \"api.example.com\", \"description\": \"vendor API\"}]. An IP list can be FQDN-only; ip_ranges is then optional.",
+  "items": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      {
+        "properties": {
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "fqdn": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "fqdn"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "ip_ranges"
-]New value: +[
+  "name"
+]
  2. Addedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so effectively: it explicitly labels this a 'WRITE OPERATION' that changes PCE state, and explains the approval-gating behavior in clients (call pauses, not failed, must not be retried). This is critical context beyond what any structured field provides.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then the entry constraint, then the write-operation warning and client-gating detail. Every sentence contributes essential information without repetition or filler.

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 the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is complete enough: it covers what the tool does, how to call it (at least one entry), the write side effect, and the client-specific approval behavior. It does not need to explain return values since no output schema exists.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds a meaningful constraint not present in the schema—'At least one entry is required' (the schema only requires 'name')—which helps the agent avoid invalid calls. It also repeats the input types (ranges, FQDNs) but goes beyond schema by clarifying the minimum content requirement.

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?

States a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('IP List') and enumerates the input types (IP ranges, FQDNs, or both), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update-iplist and delete-iplist. An agent can identify the tool's function 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?

Provides clear context: it creates a new IP list and requires at least one entry. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus update-iplist or mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage is strongly implied but not fully elaborated with alternatives.

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