Drag steps to the numbered slots on the right, or tap a step then tap a slot.
Steps
Order
1Step 1
2Step 2
3Step 3
4Step 4
5Step 5
CCNA Intent Practice Question
Drag and drop the following steps into the correct order to describe the general workflow for AI-assisted network configuration automation: receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, call tools, validate output, and apply closed-loop remediation.
⚠ Common exam trap
The sequence must follow the logical progression: start by receiving the intent, then break it into actionable steps, execute those steps, check the results, and finally correct any issues. Only Option A matches this order.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, call tools, validate output, apply closed-loop remediation [CORRECT]
The correct sequence for AI-assisted network configuration automation is: receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, call tools, validate output, and apply closed-loop remediation. Only Option A follows this exact order. Options B, C, and D deviate from the standard workflow and are therefore incorrect.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, call tools, validate output, apply closed-loop remediation [CORRECT]
Why this is correct
The correct sequence begins by receiving a high-level intent (a declarative goal such as 'ensure high availability for voice VLAN') before the system understands what to accomplish. That intent must be decomposed into concrete sub-tasks, because each sub-task maps to specific network devices, protocols, or configuration objects. Only after that decomposition can the system select and call the appropriate tools (e.g., NETCONF, RESTCONF, CLI scripts) to apply changes. Finally, output is validated against the original intent using telemetry and state checks, and any deviation triggers closed-loop remediation—this ordering guarantees the loop is measurable and auditable.
- ✗
call tools, receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, validate output, apply closed-loop remediation
Why it's wrong here
This option reverses the fundamental dependency by placing 'call tools' as the very first step, before receiving intent or decomposing it. A tool cannot be invoked meaningfully without an understood intent, because there is no goal against which to choose the tool's target or arguments. Even if the remaining steps follow, this ordering makes the workflow react to a nonexistent or assumed request, violating the definition of intent-driven operations. Receiving and decomposing intent must always precede any tool invocation.
- ✗
receive intent, call tools, decompose into sub-tasks, validate output, apply closed-loop remediation
Why it's wrong here
This option is wrong because it jumps from receiving intent directly to calling tools, skipping the necessary decomposition phase. Without breaking the intent into logical sub-tasks, there is no blueprint to decide which tools or parameters are required, so tool calls become arbitrary. Although validation and remediation are placed correctly at the end, a premature tool call could configure the wrong devices or apply partial changes that then fail validation. Decomposition is a prerequisite for tool selection in any intent-based workflow.
- ✗
receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, validate output, call tools, apply closed-loop remediation
Why it's wrong here
This option incorrectly inserts 'validate output' before any tool has been called, so there is no output yet to inspect. Validation requires comparing actual operational results—returned by CLI, RESTCONF, or telemetry—against the expected state derived from the decomposed sub-tasks. By moving validation ahead of tool execution, the system would be checking a null or stale state, missing configuration errors, and forcing the remediation loop to act on false positives. The only valid position for validation is after tool execution has produced real, measurable changes.
Option-by-option analysis
Why each answer is right or wrong
Understanding why wrong answers are wrong — and when they would be correct — is what separates a 750 score from a 900. The 200-301 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.
✓receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, call tools, validate output, apply closed-loop remediation [CORRECT]Correct answer▾
Why this is correct
The correct sequence begins by receiving a high-level intent (a declarative goal such as 'ensure high availability for voice VLAN') before the system understands what to accomplish. That intent must be decomposed into concrete sub-tasks, because each sub-task maps to specific network devices, protocols, or configuration objects. Only after that decomposition can the system select and call the appropriate tools (e.g., NETCONF, RESTCONF, CLI scripts) to apply changes. Finally, output is validated against the original intent using telemetry and state checks, and any deviation triggers closed-loop remediation—this ordering guarantees the loop is measurable and auditable.
✗call tools, receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, validate output, apply closed-loop remediationWrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
The order incorrectly places 'call tools' before 'receive intent', which is logically impossible.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates might think that tool calling is the first action, confusing it with traditional automation where scripts directly call APIs.
✗receive intent, call tools, decompose into sub-tasks, validate output, apply closed-loop remediationWrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
The order skips decomposition before tool calls, which would result in calling tools without a clear plan.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates may assume that tool calls happen immediately after receiving intent, overlooking the planning step.
✗receive intent, decompose into sub-tasks, validate output, call tools, apply closed-loop remediationWrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
The order places 'validate output' before 'call tools', which is illogical as there is no output to validate yet.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates might think validation should happen early to catch errors, but in this workflow, validation is after execution.
Analysis generated from the official 200-301blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every 200-301 question from scratch — 1,389 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 200-301 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 200-301 exam.