Retrieve detailed information for a specific Cloud Insight rule template (metrics group) by product key and metrics group ID.
Get detailed information about a specific Cloud Insight rule template (metrics group).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| prodKey | Yes | Product key (cw_key) the metrics group belongs to | |
| metricsGroupId | Yes | Metrics group ID to retrieve details for |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Input schema / properties / prodKeyAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Product key (cw_key) the metrics group belongs to",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "metricsGroupId"
-]New value: +[
+ "prodKey",
+ "metricsGroupId"
+]v1.10.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's burden is lighter. It adds domain context (Cloud Insight rule template) but says nothing about what the returned detail contains or any prerequisites, leaving only minor added value beyond the annotation.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and object lead. It is efficient, though it stops short of adding the routing or scope detail that would make it maximally useful.
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 read-only getter with two fully documented required params and a readOnly annotation, the description is minimally sufficient. It does not explain the returned detail, and with no output schema that is a small but real gap.
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%, so both required parameters (prodKey, metricsGroupId) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or scoping detail beyond that, matching the baseline for a fully-covered 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 names a specific verb (Get detailed information) and resource (metrics group / Cloud Insight rule template), which distinguishes it from the sibling list_metrics_groups and the create/update/delete variants. The parenthetical clarification ties the fetched object to its conceptual name, aiding recognition.
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 phrasing 'about a specific...' implies it retrieves a single entity versus the list variant, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative. Usage is inferable but not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.