ncloud_create_mssql_slave

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

Annotations only include destructiveHint=false, which is minimal. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the literal 'Create' action—no mention of asynchronous processing, prerequisites, side effects, or error cases. This leaves the agent without insight into the operation's behavior beyond its existence.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and target. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 create operation with complete schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate, but it omits expected return values (no output schema) and any usage context. The lack of behavioral detail further limits completeness, though the core purpose is clear.

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 complete descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline of 3 applies. The tool description itself does not elaborate on parameters, but the schema fully documents them.

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 the action ('Create') and the target resource ('a slave server instance for a Cloud DB for MSSQL instance'). The resource is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like ncloud_create_mysql_slave, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 implies when to use the tool (when creating a MSSQL slave), but provides no explicit context about prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions. It is purely a statement of purpose without additional usage guidance.

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