The modelCustomizationName is currently being set to the actual model name instead of the instance name.

serviceSpecification response snippet:

"resourceSpecification": [
{
"id": "1b2e1c8f-c679-4aa9-ad87-5ea52e77cc2d",
"version": "1.0",
"name": "e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804",
"instanceName": "e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804 0",
"resourceInvariantUUID": "ffd5d73c-e8e5-4352-be24-82a05696994b",
"@type": "ONAPresource",
"modelCustomizationId": "100e68b5-33d3-48bb-8386-cd888fb27ffe",
"modelCustomizationName": "e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804"
},

corresponding snippet from SDC response:

"resources": [
{
"resourceInstanceName": "e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804 0",
"resourceName": "e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804",
"resourceInvariantUUID": "ffd5d73c-e8e5-4352-be24-82a05696994b",
"resourceVersion": "1.0",
"resoucreType": "VF",
"resourceUUID": "1b2e1c8f-c679-4aa9-ad87-5ea52e77cc2d",

corresponding TOSCA topology template snippet :

topology_template:
node_templates:
e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804 0:
type: org.openecomp.resource.vf.E86d9dea959b4a759804
metadata:
invariantUUID: ffd5d73c-e8e5-4352-be24-82a05696994b
UUID: 1b2e1c8f-c679-4aa9-ad87-5ea52e77cc2d
customizationUUID: 100e68b5-33d3-48bb-8386-cd888fb27ffe
version: '1.0'
name: e86d9dea-959b-4a75-9804
description: vendor software product
type: VF

Basically the modelCustomizationName can either be set to the same value as the resourceInstanceName from the SDC API for the resource, or the actual node template name from the service template (highlighted in red above).

Also, it would mean we have 2 redundant information in the response, instanceName and modelCustomizationName, is that really necessary? I believe we should only keep one of the 2.