ncloud_add_nic_acg

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

The description only restates the action already evident from the tool name and annotations. With destructiveHint:false already declaring non-destructiveness, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as idempotency, effect on existing ACGs, or required permissions.

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 of eight words, front-loading the action and resource without unnecessary words.

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 two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and an annotation, the description is minimally adequate but lacks details about the operation's effect on existing ACGs or failure conditions, which would be valuable for correct invocation.

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 fully describes both parameters (networkInterfaceNo and accessControlGroupNoList). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for complete schema coverage.

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 uses a clear verb 'Add' and specifies the resource 'access control groups (ACGs)' and target 'network interface'. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_remove_nic_acg.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ncloud_remove_nic_acg. The description simply states the action without prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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