ncloud_assign_secondary_ips

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameter choice, but does not mention any side effects, prerequisites (e.g., network interface must exist), limitations, or whether the assignment is immediate or asynchronous. This is a significant gap for a mutation operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every piece of information is useful. There is no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with complete schema coverage, the description is adequate but lacks contextual details such as expected output, whether the operation is reversible, or any constraints on the number of secondary IPs. The lack of annotations and output schema makes the description the only source for such behavior, but it remains minimal.

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 schema covers 100% of parameter descriptions, but the description adds crucial semantic context by indicating that secondaryIpList and secondaryIpCount are mutually exclusive alternatives. This is not present in the schema, which merely lists the parameters without this relationship.

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 specific verb ('Assign') and resource ('secondary IPs to a network interface'), clearly stating the tool's function. It also distinguishes from the sibling tool ncloud_unassign_secondary_ips by the action of assigning versus unassigning.

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 clear usage context by explaining the two modes: provide either secondaryIpList or secondaryIpCount. This helps the agent choose the right parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the name and clear action make the use case evident.

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