Skip to main content
Glama
ogbm77

Cisco CX Cloud MCP Server

by ogbm77

get_covered_assets

Retrieve all assets covered by contracts for a specific customer to manage hardware inventory and service agreements.

Instructions

Get all assets covered by contracts for a specific customer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
customerIdYesThe customer ID

Implementation Reference

  • Handler implementation for the get_covered_assets tool. Validates the customerId parameter, makes an authenticated API call to the Cisco CX Cloud /contracts/coverage endpoint, and returns the response data as JSON-formatted text content.
    case "get_covered_assets": {
      const customerId = args?.customerId as string;
      if (!customerId) {
        throw new Error("customerId is required");
      }
      const data = await makeApiCall("/contracts/coverage", customerId);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:136-150 (registration)
    Registration of the get_covered_assets tool in the tools list, including name, description, and input schema. This is returned by the ListTools handler.
    {
      name: "get_covered_assets",
      description: "Get all assets covered by contracts for a specific customer.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          customerId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The customer ID",
          },
        },
        required: ["customerId"],
      },
    },
    {
  • Input schema definition for the get_covered_assets tool, specifying an object with a required 'customerId' string property.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        customerId: {
          type: "string",
          description: "The customer ID",
        },
      },
      required: ["customerId"],
    },
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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the action 'Get all assets' but does not describe return format, pagination, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output, which are needed for full understanding. Without annotations or output schema, more descriptive context would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'customerId' documented as 'The customer ID.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or validation rules. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'assets covered by contracts for a specific customer,' making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_uncovered_assets' by specifying 'covered' assets, but does not explicitly differentiate from others like 'get_contracts' or 'get_hardware_inventory' in terms of scope or data type.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing a valid customer ID, or specify use cases like contract management versus asset tracking. With siblings like 'get_uncovered_assets' and 'get_contracts,' explicit usage context is missing.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ogbm77/cisco-cx-cloud-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server