Retrieves a list of Virtual Private Clouds (VPCs) in your Naver Cloud Platform environment.
VPC 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_vpcs"
}
}| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'retrieve the list' without mentioning return format, pagination, permissions, or any side effects. For a list operation, this leaves significant ambiguity about what the agent will receive.
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 in Korean that directly conveys the purpose without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.
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?
The tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema. The description covers the core function but does not specify the shape of the returned data or any constraints. For a basic list operation, it is minimally adequate but could be more informative.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and there is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema already covers.
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 '조회합니다' (retrieve) and the resource 'VPC 목록' (VPC list). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_load_balancers and list_servers, 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 usage is implied by the tool name and description: use this when you need to list VPCs. However, it provides no explicit alternatives or exclusions, though the sibling tools for other resources make the context clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.