Retrieve a configuration group by ID or exact name, including its feature profiles and associated devices. Use it to inspect group membership and profile details in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Manager.
Get one configuration group (by ID or exact name) with its feature profiles and associated devices.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| config_group | Yes | Configuration group ID or exact name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' clearly signals a read-only operation and the mention of embedded feature profiles/devices conveys return shape, but nothing is said about behavior when the group doesn't exist, permission requirements, or result size.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the identifier options and returned contents appended efficiently. No filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, the description helpfully names the main returned components (feature profiles, associated devices). Missing only edge-case/error behavior for a lookup tool, which keeps it just short of complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented as 'Configuration group ID or exact name'. The description restates the same fact rather than adding matching rules, case sensitivity, or ambiguity handling, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get one configuration group') and even outlines the payload (feature profiles and associated devices). It implicitly contrasts with list_config_groups by emphasizing 'one', though no sibling is named explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The parenthetical 'by ID or exact name' hints at how to identify the target, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus list_config_groups, get_feature_profile, or get_attached_devices. Usage is inferable from the name and description only.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.