Remove a rule from a FortiGate app-control profile by its ID to clean up or adjust application control filtering.
Remove a rule from an app-control profile by its id (see list_app_control_profiles).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Rule id | |
| vdom | No | VDOM (default: FORTIGATE_VDOM, usually root) | |
| profile | Yes | Profile name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Remove' signals a destructive mutation, but the description does not disclose permissions, reversibility, failure behavior, 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?
It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The essential action, resource, and id prerequisite are all communicated efficiently.
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?
For a simple delete operation with full schema coverage, the description is adequate about what is deleted and how to identify it. With no annotations and no output schema, it should do more to disclose destructive behavior, permissions, or expected result.
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 100%, so the schema already documents id, profile, and vdom. The description adds only 'by its id' and a cross-reference for finding the id, which is marginal beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a rule from an app-control profile by its id.' It distinguishes the operation from list/add siblings and points to list_app_control_profiles for the required id, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or conditions.
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 parenthetical reference to list_app_control_profiles gives an implied prerequisite for obtaining the rule id. However, it does not explain when to choose this delete operation over alternatives or any conditions/exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.