Create a SecIntel profile to configure threat intelligence feeds and enable security monitoring in HPE Security Director Cloud.
Create a new SecIntel profile object.
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or validation behavior. The description is merely a restatement of the action.
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 very concise at one sentence, but it lacks substance. It earns its place by stating the purpose, but could be more informative without being verbose.
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?
Given the complexity (nested object parameter, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a SecIntel profile is, what typical fields are involved, or what the response contains. The sibling tools provide context but the description itself is incomplete.
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 input schema has one parameter 'body' with description 'JSON request body matching the target Security Director Cloud schema.' The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond that. While schema coverage is 100%, the description is generic and doesn't clarify required fields or constraints.
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 states 'Create a new SecIntel profile object,' which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from get/update/delete siblings by name, but adds no additional context about what a SecIntel profile is.
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 use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update or list), no prerequisites, and no mention of idempotency or uniqueness constraints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.