Skip to main content
Glama
vmware-skills

vmware-nsx-security

by vmware-skills
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

delete_dfw_policy

Destructive

Delete a DFW security policy after previewing its blast radius and obtaining confirmation. Refuses deletion if the policy still contains rules.

Instructions

[WRITE] Delete a DFW security policy; refuses while it still holds rules.

Without confirm=True this only previews: it returns blast_radius (the policy's name, category, sequence_number, rule_count and rule_ids, blockers, unmeasured) and deletes nothing. Show that to the user and get their decision. Do not set confirm=True on your own because the user asked to delete earlier: they have not seen the blast radius yet.

confirm=True refuses, deleting nothing, while the policy still holds rules — list them with list_dfw_rules and clear each with delete_dfw_rule first — or when its rules could not be read. Returns {"action": "preview" | "deleted", "blast_radius": ...}, else {"error", "hint", "blast_radius"?}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNoOptional NSX Manager target from config.
confirmNoFalse (default) returns the blast radius and changes nothing. True applies it.
policy_idYesID of the policy to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.13.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "False (default) returns the blast radius and changes nothing. True applies it.",
+  "title": "Confirm",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.10.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / policy_id / description
      Added value: +"ID of the policy to delete."
    • addedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Added value: +"Optional NSX Manager target from config."
  3. Addedv1.5.29
  4. Removedv1.5.28
  5. First observedv1.3.2

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint and readOnlyHint annotations, the description fully discloses the two-phase behavior: without confirm it only previews and returns blast_radius; with confirm it refuses when rules remain or rules could not be read. It even specifies the exact return envelope and error shape, which annotations and schema do not provide.

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 description is front-loaded with the core action and key restriction, then proceeds logically through preview mode, confirm mode, and return shapes. It is longer than typical, but nearly every sentence carries operational necessity; the only mild redundancy is the repeated statement about refusing while rules exist.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given there is no output schema, the description fully specifies the return payload and error format. It also provides complete preconditions (no rules held, rules readable), names the exact sibling tools needed to satisfy them, and explains the required user-facing flow. No essential operational detail is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful nuance beyond the schema. It clarifies that confirm=True not only 'applies' the deletion but refuses under specific conditions, and it defines precisely what blast_radius contains in preview mode. It does not add much for policy_id or target, but the confirm parameter behavior is significantly enriched.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with an explicit verb and resource: 'Delete a DFW security policy; refuses while it still holds rules.' This immediately distinguishes it from siblings like delete_dfw_rule and list_dfw_policies, and the constraint 'refuses while it still holds rules' adds a precise boundary.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives direct when-to-use guidance and names the alternatives needed: 'list them with list_dfw_rules and clear each with delete_dfw_rule first'. It also includes explicit negative guidance: 'Do not set confirm=True on your own because the user asked to delete earlier: they have not seen the blast radius yet.'

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools