Retrieve a specific NAT policy rule from a rule group by providing policy, group, and rule IDs to inspect its configuration.
Get a rule inside a NAT policy rule group.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| rule_id | Yes | ||
| group_id | Yes | ||
| 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 provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, error handling, permissions, or side effects.
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?
Description is a single 11-word sentence, no redundancy, efficiently conveys the core purpose.
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 3 required parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It lacks details on return value, parameter relationships (e.g., how policy_id and group_id nest), and does not compensate for missing schema descriptions.
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 coverage is 0% and the description does not explain parameters. Parameter names (rule_id, group_id, policy_id) are self-explanatory but no additional context is given, so score is baseline 3.
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 'Get' and the resource 'a rule inside a NAT policy rule group', distinguishing it from siblings like 'sdcloud_get_nat_policy_rule' which gets a rule without group context, and 'sdcloud_list_nat_policy_rules_in_group' which lists rules.
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 vs alternatives like 'sdcloud_get_nat_policy_rule' (which does not require a group_id) or 'sdcloud_list_nat_policy_rules_in_group'. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.