Create a new device group by specifying its name, description, and device UUIDs in a JSON body to organize and manage network devices.
Create a new device group. Body typically includes name, description, device UUIDs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | JSON request body matching the target Security Director Cloud schema. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It hints at typical body fields (name, description, device UUIDs) but does not explain idempotency, error cases, required permissions, or side effects of creation.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no extraneous information.
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 create tool with a complex nested body and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the role of device groups, creation behavior, or what happens after success (e.g., returned ID). Context is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's impact.
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% for the single 'body' parameter, setting a baseline of 3. The tool description adds context about typical fields (name, description, device UUIDs) beyond the schema's generic description, providing some added meaning.
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 'Create a new device group' with a specific verb and resource. Sibling tools include other CRUD operations (list, get, update, delete), so this tool is well-distinguished as a creation tool.
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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Usage is implied solely by the action 'Create', but no context about prerequisites or alternatives is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.