Trigger a cleanup job to remove unused objects and rules that reference a firewall policy. Specify cleanup mode like STRICT to start.
Trigger a cleanup job for unused objects/rules referencing a firewall policy. Body requires cleanup_mode (e.g. STRICT).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | JSON request body matching the target Security Director Cloud schema. | |
| policy_id | Yes |
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. It only states that the tool triggers a cleanup job and mentions the body requires cleanup_mode. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether objects/rules are deleted, permissions needed, or if the job is asynchronous. Minimal disclosure.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word earns its place, providing essential information efficiently.
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?
With two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the cleanup job entails, what responses to expect, accepted cleanup_mode values (only an example given), or prerequisites. Leaves many operational gaps.
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?
The description adds meaning to the body parameter by specifying that it requires cleanup_mode (e.g., STRICT). However, it does not describe the policy_id parameter or provide details on the body's structure beyond the example. Schema coverage is 50%, and the description partially compensates.
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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Trigger' and resource 'cleanup job for unused objects/rules referencing a firewall policy'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sdcloud_cleanup_nat_policy, but could further differentiate from sdcloud_start_policy_cleanup_job, which may be a generic trigger.
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?
The description gives an example of cleanup_mode (e.g., STRICT) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sdcloud_deploy_firewall_policy or sdcloud_start_policy_cleanup_job. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.