Illumio MCP Server

create-workload

Add an unmanaged workload to the Illumio PCE, making it visible and manageable for security policy enforcement.

Instructions

Create a Illumio Core unmanaged workload in the PCE 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>",
      "ip_addresses": "<ip_addresses>"
    },
    "name": "create-workload"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`labels`	No
`ip_addresses`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.8.0Sep 18, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / labels / items / key
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / labels / items / properties
```
Added value: +{
+  "key": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "value": {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / labels / items / type
```
Added value: +"object"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / labels / items / value
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
Addedv1.0.0Jan 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that this is a WRITE OPERATION changing PCE state and that gated clients may pause for user approval, adding important operational context beyond the tool name.

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 very concise, with two sentences that each earn their place: one for purpose and one for critical write-approval behavior. It is front-loaded with the core action.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite the useful gating warning, the description omits parameter guidance, return-value expectations, and any constraints on labels or IP address formats. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, these gaps leave the tool only partially specified for an agent.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description provides no information about 'name', 'labels', or 'ip_addresses'. The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 action ('Create') and a specific resource ('an Illumio Core unmanaged workload in the PCE'), making the tool's purpose clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update-workload and delete-workload.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for creating unmanaged workloads, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or describe when not to use it. It gives clear context for the operation but no exclusions or alternative routing.

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

Deploy Server