Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Visual Sentinel

by com.visualsentinel
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete an alert rule

vs_alert_rules_delete
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete an alert rule. Its alerts stop; the built-in alerts are not affected. This cannot be undone.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "vs_alert_rules_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAlert rule id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description still earns credit by disclosing consequences beyond the annotations: existing alerts cease firing, built-in alerts are exempt, and the action is irreversible.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then consequences, then irreversibility. Every clause carries distinct information with no repetition of the title or schema.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter destructive delete with no output schema, the description covers action, side effects, exception (built-in rules), and reversibility. Only a note on what happens on invalid/nonexistent id or confirmatory behavior is missing.

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?

Only one parameter, and the schema documents it at 100% coverage ('Alert rule id.'). The description adds nothing about the id (format, lookup path), so baseline 3 applies since the schema does all the work.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Delete an alert rule'), which makes it clearly distinct from the create/get/list/update siblings that share the vs_alert_rules_ prefix. It stops short of naming a sibling or scoping what an 'alert rule' is, so it lands just below the top mark.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the mutation verb rather than stated: there's no explicit 'use this instead of X' routing or precondition check (e.g., deactivate via update first). The 'built-in alerts are not affected' line gives some selection context but is about scope, not when-to-use.

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

All Visual Sentinel toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources