Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Illumio MCP Server

Illumio MCP Server

by alexgoller
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

delete-workload

Remove a workload from the Illumio PCE by providing its href or name. Deletes the specified workload to clean up policy management.

Instructions

Delete a workload from the PCE. Identify by href (preferred) or name. 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

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "delete-workload"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hrefNoWorkload href (e.g., /orgs/1/workloads/xxxx)
nameNoWorkload name (alternative to href)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.8.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / href
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Workload href (e.g., /orgs/1/workloads/xxxx)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"Workload name (alternative to href)"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "name"
-]
  2. Addedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it labels the tool as 'WRITE OPERATION: changes PCE state' and warns that in gated clients the call pauses for user approval, adding that the call has not failed and must not be retried while waiting. This is significant behavioral context, though it does not discuss side effects or reversibility.

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 three short sentences, each earning its place: the action, the identification guidance, and the critical behavioral warning. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no filler.

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?

For a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential facts: what is deleted, how to identify it, that it changes PCE state, and the approval-gating behavior affecting retries. It omits finer details like permanence or cancellation handling, but is strong for this tool's complexity.

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 already provides 100% coverage for both parameters, including the fact that name is an alternative to href. The description reinforces this with 'href (preferred) or name' but adds no new semantic information beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Delete a workload from the PCE.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete-deny-rule or delete-iplist, and even from update-workload and create-workload, by naming the workload as the target.

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?

It gives invocation-level guidance ('Identify by href (preferred) or name') but does not explicitly describe when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update-workload or other delete-* siblings. No exclusions or alternative routing is provided; the usage context is implied through the tool name and action.

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