Set tenant-wide content security policies to control web access, filter content, and block potential threats across your organization.
Update the tenant-wide content security settings singleton.
| 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 carries the full burden. It says 'Update' but does not disclose if it is an idempotent patch or a full replace, whether it requires specific permissions, or any side effects on existing settings. The scope 'tenant-wide' is useful but insufficient for a mutation tool.
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?
A single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope.
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 tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. However, with numerous sibling tools and no explanation of the singleton concept or relationship to other settings, it lacks sufficient context for an agent to confidently select this tool over similar ones.
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 100%; the single parameter 'body' has a schema description but it is generic ('JSON request body matching the target schema'). The tool description adds no additional meaning about the body's structure or required fields, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 uses the verb 'Update' and clearly identifies the resource as 'tenant-wide content security settings singleton.' It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'sdcloud_get_content_security_settings' (read) and other setting update tools.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus other settings tools like 'sdcloud_set_firewall_global_settings' or 'sdcloud_set_proxy_server_config.' The context of 'tenant-wide' and 'singleton' implies it is for a single, global settings object, but no when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.