ncloud_cdss_disable_public_domain

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

The annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries less burden. However, the description does not add any behavioral context beyond the action itself, such as prerequisites, reversibility, or effects on existing access. No additional transparency is provided.

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, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant or vague language. It earns its place efficiently.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any context about prerequisites, response behavior, or relationship to sibling tools, which a more complete description could provide.

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 single parameter serviceGroupInstanceNo is fully described in the schema as 'Cluster instance number' (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter context, 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 clearly states a specific action ('Disable') applied to a specific resource ('public domain for CMAK management tool access'). This is unambiguous and distinguishes the tool from siblings like enable_public_domain and disable_public_endpoint.

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 usage is implied by the tool's name and description: use it when you need to disable public domain access. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives, such as the related enable_public_domain or disable_public_endpoint tools.

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