magicsword-mcp

Official

by magicsword-io

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

List computer groups

list_endpoint_groups

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists paginated endpoint groups in your organization, including parent group IDs, so you can select group IDs for policy previews and membership checks.

Instructions

Lists paginated endpoint groups in the authenticated organization, including their parent group IDs. Requires endpoints:read. Use selected group IDs with apply_policy_to_endpoints to preview current members (including subgroups by default). Group assignment is a one-time snapshot, not an automatic rule for future members.

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_endpoint_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Page size, default 100
`offset`	No	Pagination offset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.1.6Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the required endpoints:read scope, pagination semantics, and the important caveat that group assignment is a one-time snapshot rather than a dynamic rule for future members.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and return fields, then permissions, then the sibling hand-off. The final snapshot caveat is about downstream group assignment rather than this tool, so it is slightly tangential but still earns its place by preventing a common misuse.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a read-only two-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, return fields, authorization requirement, and pagination. No output schema exists, but the description names the salient returned data (group IDs and parent group IDs), which is enough for correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both limit (1-500, default 100) and offset (0-1,000,000) documented in the schema itself. The description only says the listing is 'paginated' and adds no syntax, ordering, or default details beyond what the schema already supplies, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists paginated endpoint groups in the authenticated organization') plus the returned detail ('including their parent group IDs'). The scope ('in the authenticated organization') and 'group' terminology clearly separate it from sibling list_endpoints without needing the schema.

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?

Provides clear usage context: requires endpoints:read, and the selected group IDs are meant to be passed to apply_policy_to_endpoints. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over list_endpoints or show_endpoint, so there is no named exclusion, but the downstream workflow is concrete.

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