Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
io.github.AIops-tools/symantec-clouddlp-aiops

io.github.AIops-tools/symantec-clouddlp-aiops

by AIops-tools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

clouddlp_profile

Read-only

Retrieve a Symantec CloudSOC DLP profile by profile ID to inspect its configuration and support read-only policy analysis.

Instructions

[READ] Read a DLP profile.

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": {
      "profile_id": "<profile_id>"
    },
    "name": "clouddlp_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
profile_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safe-read profile, and "[READ]" merely repeats it. Nothing is added about failure behavior for an unknown profile_id, whether the call is paginated or rate limited, or what the agent gets back.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler, but the brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency — there is no second sentence carrying any substantive information.

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?

For a tool in a large DLP family with a required identifier parameter, no output schema, and no annotation detail beyond readOnlyHint, the description gives an agent almost nothing to distinguish this from the ~13 sibling tools or to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% — profile_id has only a type and a title. The description does not say what a profile_id is, its format (numeric ID vs. name/slug), or where to source it, so the single undocumented parameter is left entirely to inference.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Read a DLP profile" restates the tool name (clouddlp_profile) with a verb appended; there is no scope, no description of what a profile contains, and no differentiation from siblings such as clouddlp_profiles or clouddlp_profile_history beyond the singular noun.

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 only guidance is the "[READ]" tag. It never says when to use this single-profile fetch versus clouddlp_profiles or clouddlp_profile_history, and gives no prerequisites (e.g., that a valid profile_id must first be obtained from the list tool).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools