Tenable OT Security MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List archived port groups

list_archived_port_groups

List soft-deleted port groups with pagination support, enabling retrieval of archived network port configurations for audit or restore.

Instructions

Soft-deleted port groups, paginated.

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": "list_archived_port_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`after_cursor`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'paginated', which is already inferable from the limit and after_cursor parameters in the schema. It does not disclose behavior such as whether archived groups are excluded from normal listing, permission requirements, or how pagination works.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short and front-loaded, containing only four words. While it is not bloated, it borders on under-specification, omitting context that would be valuable for an agent.

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?

For a simple list tool with an output schema and two optional params, the description captures the essential distinction (archived/soft-deleted) but lacks guidance on pagination semantics, usage scenarios, and behavioral expectations. It is incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only says 'paginated' without explaining how limit and after_cursor function. The agent is left inferring that these are pagination controls, with no details about cursor format or default behavior.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Soft-deleted port groups, paginated' clearly identifies the resource (port groups) and the distinguishing feature (soft-deleted/archived). While it lacks an explicit verb, the tool name 'list_archived_port_groups' provides the action. It differentiates from siblings like list_port_groups and other list_archived_* tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_port_groups or other archived list tools. The description only states what it lists but does not mention when to choose it over the non-archived version.

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

Deploy Server