Skip to main content
Glama
Antxine

PanOS MCP Server

by Antxine
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

find_security_rules

Read-only

Search security or decryption rules by name, zone, address, user, app, service, category, tag, or description. Returns inherited rules in evaluation order and flags missing log forwarding.

Instructions

[READ-ONLY] Searches security or decryption rules (pre/post) in Panorama's running config. Matches 'contains' against rule name, zones, addresses, users, applications, services, categories, tags and description. With 'device_group', rules of that group AND everything it inherits (shared, parent groups) are returned in evaluation order; with 'device', only rules applying to that firewall. Output flags rules without log forwarding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deviceNoSpecific firewall (hostname or serial). Usually omit it: the firewall is chosen from device_group, or from the user's/IP's recent traffic.
policyNoDefault: security
containsNoCase-insensitive text to look for (object, user, group, app, category, rule name...)
firewallNoPanorama entry from firewalls.json. Optional when a single Panorama is configured.
max_resultsNoMaximum entries returned (default: 50)
device_groupNoDevice group name (includes what it inherits from shared and parent groups), or 'shared'. When omitted, every location is searched.
include_disabledNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.30

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description explains matching behavior across many rule attributes, inheritance semantics in evaluation order, and the log-forwarding flag on output. This is substantial behavioral disclosure with no contradiction to the annotations.

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?

Four concise sentences front-load the core operation and then add targeted detail on matching and scoping. Every sentence contributes distinct information without redundancy.

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?

The description plus schema cover the essential invocation details for a 7-parameter, read-only search tool. It does not describe the full return shape or what happens when both device_group and device are provided, but these are minor gaps for invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description enriches the device_group and device parameters by explaining inherited rules and evaluation order, and clarifies the contains matching scope. This adds meaning beyond the schema's simple descriptions.

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 specifies a search operation over security or decryption rules in Panorama's running configaine and lists the fields matched. It does not explicitly name sibling tools like get_security_rules or panorama_get_pre_rules, but the search vs. get distinction is functionally clear.

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?

The description gives useful scoping context for device_group vs. device and notes that output flags rules without log forwarding. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this search tool over sibling get tools, nor provide exclusion criteria, so guidance remains implicit rather than direct.

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