Packet Tracer Visual MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

ptv_configureIos

Send Cisco IOS commands to routers or switches in Packet Tracer simulations. Accepts a single command or multiple commands as an array for automated configuration.

Instructions

Send Cisco IOS commands to one router or switch. Commands may be a string or an array of strings.

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": {
      "deviceName": "<deviceName>",
      "commands": "<commands>"
    },
    "name": "ptv_configureIos"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deviceName`	Yes
`commands`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 18, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. Only mentions that commands can be a string or array, but does not disclose execution behavior, side effects, or device state requirements.

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?

Single sentence, 14 words, fully front-loaded. No wasted words, efficient for a simple tool.

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?

Given zero schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. Lacks return value information, error handling, and usage context for a tool with two required parameters.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and description only adds that commands can be a string or array. It does not explain the 'deviceName' parameter or provide additional meaning beyond basic schema information.

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?

Description clearly states 'send Cisco IOS commands to one router or switch', identifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'ptv_runShowCommands' but does not explicitly differentiate from similar 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ptv_applyCampusIosConfig' or 'ptv_runShowCommands'. Missing context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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