Activates the ModSecurity web application firewall across all hosted domains to protect websites from common attacks and malicious requests.
Enable ModSecurity (WAF) for all domains
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and scope, but does not mention idempotence, effects on existing per-domain settings, potential service disruption, reversibility, or the nature of the response.
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, tightly worded sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place: 'Enable', 'ModSecurity (WAF)', and 'for all domains'.
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?
This is a simple enable operation with no parameters and no output schema. The description adequately captures the essential scope and purpose. It could be slightly more complete by noting the per-domain alternative, but the current text is sufficient for a tool of this simplicity.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds scope context ('all domains') that enriches the parameterless invocation, though there is nothing else to document.
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 a specific verb ('Enable'), identifies the resource ('ModSecurity (WAF)'), and defines the exact scope ('for all domains'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like enable_modsecurity_domain and disable_modsecurity.
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 phrase 'for all domains' gives clear context that this is a global enabling operation. However, it does not explicitly mention the per-domain alternative (enable_modsecurity_domain) or state when to choose one over the other.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.