ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud_cdss_change_kafka_config

Idempotent

Change Kafka configuration settings in a Config Group by providing the group number and key-value pairs to update.

Instructions

Change Kafka configuration settings in a Config Group

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "configGroupNo": "<configGroupNo>",
      "kafkaConfig": "<kafkaConfig>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_cdss_change_kafka_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kafkaConfig`	Yes	Kafka config key-value pairs to change
`configGroupNo`	Yes	Config group number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as idempotent and non-destructive, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not mention whether changes take effect immediately, require a restart, or need to be applied via a separate step, which is critical for a config mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, straightforward sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is minimal and lacks essential context: it does not clarify the effect of the change, whether it is applied immediately or requires a separate apply action, or what kind of return value to expect. Given the absence of an output schema and the existence of a sibling apply_config_group tool, this leaves critical gaps for an agent deciding whether to invoke this tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no supplementary information about the parameters beyond what the schema already states, such as the format of kafkaConfig key-value pairs or the meaning of configGroupNo.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Change' and identifies the resource as 'Kafka configuration settings in a Config Group'. This clearly indicates the operation and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_kafka_config (read) and apply_config_group (apply).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 like apply_config_group or rolling_restart. The description implies it is for modifying config, but lacks context about prerequisites, sequencing, or exclusion criteria.

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

Deploy Server