ncloud_add_mysql_users

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already provide (destructiveHint=false). It does not mention permissions, idempotency, error scenarios, or side effects. The one-line description simply reiterates the tool's purpose without enriching the agent's understanding of the operation's behavior.

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 directly states the action and target. Every word is necessary, and it is front-loaded with the main purpose. There is no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple add operation with a well-detailed schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks useful context such as whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if a user already exists, or any prerequisites. Given no output schema, the agent might benefit from more information, but the tool's simplicity keeps it at an acceptable level.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters (cloudMysqlInstanceNo and cloudMysqlUserList). The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so it stays at baseline. It does not clarify the allowed values for 'authority' (e.g., READ, DDL, CRUD) which are enumerated only in the schema but not as enums.

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 (add) and the target resource (users to a Cloud DB for MySQL instance). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like ncloud_add_mysql_databases, ncloud_change_mysql_users, and ncloud_delete_mysql_users by specifying the exact operation and object.

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 implies usage: when you need to add users to a MySQL instance. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives such as ncloud_change_mysql_users for modifying existing users. The guidance is minimal and relies on the user understanding the verb 'add'.

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