New Relic MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get Alert Policy

get_alert_policy

Retrieves detailed information for a specific New Relic alert policy using its policy ID, helping you inspect policy configuration and conditions.

Instructions

Get details for a specific alert policy

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "policy_id": "<policy_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_alert_policy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`policy_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv1.3.2Nov 7, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- removedInput schema / properties / policy_id / title
```
Removed value: -"Policy Id"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"get_alert_policyArguments"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / title
```
Removed value: -"Result"
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"get_alert_policyOutput"
```
- addedOutput schema / x-fastmcp-wrap-result
```
Added value: +true
```
Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0Jan 4, 2026
- addedInput schema / title
```
Added value: +"get_alert_policyArguments"
```
First observedNov 18, 2025

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but adds almost nothing: it does not state that the operation is read-only, what happens for an unknown or malformed policy_id, whether permissions are required, or how errors surface. The presence of an output schema covers return-value shape, but the mutation/safety and failure profile remain undocumented.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The sentence is short, front-loaded, and free of filler, so it reads cleanly. The issue is under-specification rather than verbosity, but structurally it is well formed.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Even for a simple single-parameter read tool, the definition is thin: no annotations, zero schema description coverage, and no hint on sourcing or formatting the policy_id. The output schema relieves the need to describe return values, but everything else an agent needs to call this confidently is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the single parameter policy_id has no structured documentation at all. The description does not describe the expected ID format, where to obtain a policy_id (e.g., from list_alert_policies), or what the identifier represents, leaving the parameter essentially unexplained.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a verb and resource ('Get details for a specific alert policy'), which is understandable, but it essentially restates the tool name and title rather than expanding on them. It implicitly distinguishes single-policy retrieval from the sibling list_alert_policies via 'specific', but never names that alternative, so the differentiation is weak.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to list_alert_policies as the alternative for enumerating policies. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.