Lists all Cloud DB instances available in your Naver Cloud Platform account.
Cloud DB 인스턴스 목록을 조회합니다
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_cloud_dbs"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it retrieves a list, but does not disclose any limitations, return format, or side effects (e.g., whether it returns all instances, pagination, or requires auth). The description essentially restates the tool's name without adding meaningful behavioral context.
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?
The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the essential information. It wastes no words and is directly relevant to the tool's function.
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?
Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate for basic invocation. However, it lacks details about the response structure or potential limitations, which would help the agent interpret results. The description is complete enough for a trivial list operation but could be improved.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). With no parameters to describe, the baseline is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. It does not add any conflicting or redundant information.
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 clearly states the action (조회/retrieve) and the resource (Cloud DB 인스턴스 목록 = list of Cloud DB instances). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from sibling list tools like list_servers and list_load_balancers, which target different resources.
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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, filters, or exclusions. It is only a bare statement of the tool's function, leaving the agent without decision-making context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.