Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud-gov-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_change_fabric_cluster_name

Idempotent

Rename a Ncloud fabric cluster by specifying its cluster number and a new name (3-30 chars, lowercase letters, digits, hyphens).

Instructions

Change a fabric cluster's name

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": {
      "fabricClusterNo": "<fabricClusterNo>",
      "fabricClusterName": "<fabricClusterName>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_change_fabric_cluster_name"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fabricClusterNoYesFabric cluster number to rename
fabricClusterNameYesNew fabric cluster name (3~30 chars: lowercase letters, digits, and '-')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context such as uniqueness constraints, propagation delays, or cluster state requirements.

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, short sentence: 'Change a fabric cluster's name.' It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple rename operation, the description covers the purpose, the schema covers parameters, and annotations cover safety. It is adequate, though it could mention any side effects or preconditions for a more complete picture.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters fully described (e.g., character limits). The description adds no further parameter semantics, relying entirely on the schema.

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 clearly identifies the resource ('a fabric cluster's name'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_change_fabric_cluster_description or ncloud_change_fabric_cluster_servers by explicitly targeting the name field.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for renaming a fabric cluster, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or conditions (e.g., cluster state requirements) are provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools