ncloud_add_route_table_subnet

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

With annotations only providing destructiveHint=false, the description adds no further behavioral context—no mention of idempotency, effects on existing associations, failure conditions, or response behavior. It does not contradict annotations, but it also does not enrich them.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the purpose with zero wasted words. It is efficient and easy to parse, striking the right length for the simplicity of the operation.

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 has no output schema and minimal annotations, yet the description provides no additional context about expected responses, preconditions, or side effects. For a mutation-like operation, this is insufficient for an agent to fully anticipate the outcome.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter briefly described. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Associate a subnet with a route table' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the action. It effectively distinguishes this tool from its sibling ncloud_remove_route_table_subnet by naming the opposite operation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description simply states the action without contextualizing it in a decision process.

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