Skip to main content
Glama
ogbm77

Cisco CX Cloud MCP Server

by ogbm77

get_hardware_eol

Retrieve hardware end-of-life information for a specific customer to identify equipment reaching end-of-life status.

Instructions

Get hardware end-of-life information for a specific customer. Shows which hardware is reaching end-of-life.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
customerIdYesThe customer ID

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for get_hardware_eol: validates customerId, calls API endpoint /product-alerts/hardware-eol, returns JSON data.
    case "get_hardware_eol": {
      const customerId = args?.customerId as string;
      if (!customerId) {
        throw new Error("customerId is required");
      }
      const data = await makeApiCall("/product-alerts/hardware-eol", customerId);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:178-190 (registration)
    Tool registration in the tools list used by ListToolsRequestHandler, including name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: "get_hardware_eol",
      description: "Get hardware end-of-life information for a specific customer. Shows which hardware is reaching end-of-life.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          customerId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The customer ID",
          },
        },
        required: ["customerId"],
      },
  • Input schema definition requiring 'customerId' string for the get_hardware_eol tool.
    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. It implies a read-only operation ('Get', 'Shows') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what 'end-of-life information' entails (e.g., dates, statuses). The description is too vague to fully inform the agent.

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?

The description is concise with two sentences that are front-loaded and to the point. However, the second sentence ('Shows which hardware is reaching end-of-life') is somewhat redundant with the first, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the return values include (e.g., hardware items, EOL dates, statuses) or provide enough context for a tool that likely involves complex data retrieval. More detail is needed to compensate for missing structured information.

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%, so the schema already documents the single parameter 'customerId'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying it's used to fetch data for that customer, which is redundant with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('hardware end-of-life information'), and it specifies the scope ('for a specific customer'). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'get_software_eol', which is similar but for software instead of hardware.

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 like 'get_hardware_inventory' or 'get_software_eol'. It mentions the target ('customer') but lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison with sibling tools.

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