ncloud_change_mongodb_shard_count

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond specifying the target resource (Sharded Cluster), but discloses no operational details such as whether the change is asynchronous, requires downtime, or has side effects.

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 immediately states the action and target, with no filler or redundancy.

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 low-complexity operation with fully documented parameters and safety annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states the resource type, but omits any mention of result behavior or preconditions, which would push it to a 5.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions), so the schema already explains the parameters. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or format details for the parameters, keeping it at the baseline.

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 'Change' and clearly identifies the resource ('number of shards in a MongoDB Sharded Cluster instance'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that change other MongoDB counts (e.g., ncloud_change_mongodb_secondary_count, ncloud_change_mongodb_mongos_count).

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, nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions. It only states what the tool does, leaving usage context unstated.

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