ncp-mcp-server

create_acg

Creates a new Access Control Group (ACG) in a specified VPC to manage network security rules for Naver Cloud Platform resources.

Instructions

새로운 ACG를 생성합니다

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": {
      "accessControlGroupName": "<accessControlGroupName>",
      "vpcNo": "<vpcNo>"
    },
    "name": "create_acg"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`vpcNo`	Yes	VPC 번호
`accessControlGroupName`	Yes	ACG 이름
`accessControlGroupDescription`	No	ACG 설명

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. However, it only states the creation action and offers no information about side effects, required permissions, idempotency, or error handling.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words, making it concise and well-structured.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple with fully documented parameters, but it lacks information about return values or dependencies. Given no output schema, the description is adequate but misses valuable context for a complete understanding.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already explains.

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 '새로운 ACG를 생성합니다' translates to 'Creates a new ACG', using a specific verb (create) and resource (ACG). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_acg or add_acg_rule.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites such as an existing VPC, nor does it suggest checking list_acgs before creation.

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