ncloud_change_mysql_spec

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

The description is limited to the change operation and does not disclose behavioral details such as downtime, rolling upgrade behavior, permission requirements, or effects. Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond that.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with no unnecessary words. It effectively communicates the core purpose without 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?

Despite the bare description, the tool definition benefits from complete parameter descriptions, annotations declaring idempotent and non-destructive behavior, and a clear purpose. It lacks an output schema and does not describe response format, but that is not required given the rich schema and annotations.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), including details about defaults and rolling upgrade behavior. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level information, so it does not go beyond the schema 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 clearly states that the tool changes the CPU/Memory specification of a Cloud DB for MySQL instance, using a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('server spec of Cloud DB for MySQL'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ncloud_change_server_spec (general servers) and ncloud_ses_change_node_spec by specifying MySQL.

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_upgrade_mysql_version or ncloud_change_mysql_users. It does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring an existing instance, or exclusions, like when a different MySQL modification tool should be used. Parameter hints exist but do not constitute usage guidelines.

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