Skip to main content
Glama
alexgoller

Illumio MCP Server

by alexgoller
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

update-iplist

Update an existing IP list in Illumio PCE by specifying its href or name. Modify its IP ranges, FQDN, or description to keep security policy current.

Instructions

Update an existing IP List in the PCE. Provide either 'href' or 'name' (but not both) to identify the IP List. 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.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fqdnNoNew Fully Qualified Domain Name (optional)
hrefNoHref of the IP List to update (e.g., /orgs/1/sec_policy/draft/ip_lists/123)
nameNoName of the IP List to update (alternative to href)
ip_rangesNoNew list of IP ranges
descriptionNoNew description for the IP List (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.8.0
    • removedInput schema / oneOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "href"
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "name"
-    ]
-  }
-]
    • changedInput schema / properties / href / description
      Previous value: -"Href of the IP List to update"New value: +"Href of the IP List to update (e.g., /orgs/1/sec_policy/draft/ip_lists/123)"
  2. Addedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it excels: it explicitly flags 'WRITE OPERATION: changes PCE state' and explains that gated clients pause for user approval, adding that the call 'has not failed and must not be retried while waiting.' This is rich safety-relevant behavioral disclosure beyond the schema.

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?

Three concise sentences with no filler: purpose, identifier rule, and safety behavior. The most important operational constraint is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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 mutation tool with 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential identifier rule, the state-changing nature, and the approval-pause behavior. It could say whether unspecified fields are overwritten or describe the response, but the schema covers parameter details and the key behavioral gaps are addressed.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful parameter semantics by specifying the exclusivity constraint between href and name, which the schema only implies. It does not repeat field-level details already present in the 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?

Description starts with a precise verb-resource pair: 'Update an existing IP List in the PCE.' It clearly identifies the object type, the scope, and that it operates on an existing resource, which distinguishes it from create-iplist, delete-iplist, and get-iplists.

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 a clear operational rule: 'Provide either href or name (but not both) to identify the IP List.' This is strong usage guidance for invocation. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like create-iplist or delete-iplist, but 'Update an existing IP List' implies the tool's context without excluding other cases.

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