ncloud_create_network_acl

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

The description adds the VPC scoping detail but does not disclose behaviors such as default rules, idempotency, or return value. The destructiveHint=false annotation already indicates this is a non-destructive operation, and the description is consistent.

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, clear sentence with no redundant information. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 low complexity, full schema parameter coverage, and non-destructive annotation, the description is adequate. However, it does not specify the response format or any post-create behavior, which could be relevant given the absence of an output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The parameter descriptions in the schema are sufficient.

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 the specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource 'Network ACL' with context 'in a VPC', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_network_acl or add_network_acl_inbound.

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 clear context (a Network ACL within a VPC) but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, such as when to add rules or delete an ACL. It implies usage but lacks exclusions or alternative references.

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