Configure reactivation preferences for a replacement RMA device in Security Director Cloud, ensuring the new device aligns with your workflow requirements.
Set up an RMA device with reactivation preferences for the replacement workflow.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | JSON request body matching the target Security Director Cloud schema. | |
| device_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 must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is idempotent, if it overrides existing preferences, or if it requires the device to be in a specific state (e.g., already activated). The description only states the action without 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?
The description is a single sentence of 15 words, which is concise and front-loaded. While it could include more detail (e.g., prerequisites), it avoids verbose repetition of schema fields.
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 no output schema, the description should explain the outcome or return value. It does not mention what happens after setting preferences (e.g., confirmation, status). The tool has a nested object parameter (body) but no guidance on its structure. The description is incomplete for an operation with two parameters and a JSON body.
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 50%. The description for 'body' ('JSON request body matching the target Security Director Cloud schema') adds context by indicating it follows an external schema, but it does not detail fields. The 'device_id' parameter lacks any description or clarification. Overall, the description provides partial compensation.
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 'Set up an RMA device with reactivation preferences for the replacement workflow' clearly identifies the tool's purpose: configuring reactivation preferences for an RMA device. The verb 'set up' is somewhat generic but acceptable, and the phrase 'reactivation preferences' distinguishes it from related tools like activate or reactivate.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sdcloud_activate_rma_device or sdcloud_reactivate_rma_device. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.