Permanently remove a custom rule from a profile, stopping its enforcement immediately. Find rule IDs with list_rules and profile IDs with list_profiles.
Delete a custom rule from a profile. Destructive: the rule stops applying immediately.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| rule_id | Yes | Rule ID (use list_rules to discover IDs) | |
| profile_id | Yes | Profile ID (use list_profiles to discover IDs) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key trait: the operation is destructive and the rule stops applying immediately. However, it omits permissions/auth requirements, whether the deletion is reversible or the rule can be recreated, and any confirmation semantics for a mutation.
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?
Two short sentences with zero filler; the destructive warning is front-loaded immediately after the action statement.
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?
For a two-parameter delete with full schema coverage, the description covers the essential effect (immediate loss of the rule's application) but says nothing about authorization, permanence, or recovery, which matters for a destructive operation with no annotations backing it.
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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented in-schema with discovery hints (list_rules, list_profiles). The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 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 (Delete) and resource (custom rule from a profile), which cleanly separates it from siblings like create_rule and list_rules. The scope ('custom rule', 'from a profile') is precise enough that no schema inspection is needed to know what it does.
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?
No guidance on when to delete versus other options, and no prerequisites or warnings about conditions that should be checked first. The usage is only implied by the verb; the agent gets no routing help beyond the obvious.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.