ncloud_cdss_get_kafka_config

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description's 'Get' verb is consistent with that, so there is no contradiction. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the read-only nature, such as what the returned settings contain, error behavior, or rate limits. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is a minimal but acceptable level of transparency.

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 that conveys the essential purpose without any filler or redundant information. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse and use.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the short description is somewhat adequate, but it lacks details about the return value structure or typical usage context. The absence of any differentiation from similar sibling tools and the lack of mention of what 'Kafka configuration settings' includes leaves some gaps in completeness.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter configGroupNo, whose description ('Config group number') is clear. The tool description does not add any extra semantic detail about the parameter, but the schema already provides sufficient information, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Get Kafka configuration settings for a Config Group' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (Kafka configuration settings for a Config Group). It is specific enough to convey the core purpose, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ncloud_cdss_get_config_group_detail, which may also return configuration-related information.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ncloud_cdss_get_config_group_detail or ncloud_cdss_change_kafka_config. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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