ncloud_create_rule_directly

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

The description clearly states the action (create) and the non-destructive nature aligns with destructiveHint=false. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, failure modes, or what the response contains, so behavioral disclosure is minimal beyond the annotations.

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 leads with the action and key differentiator. Every word contributes value, 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (5 parameters, nested arrays), the description is adequate for basic understanding but lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., how to obtain prodKey or metricGroupItemId) and does not mention what a successful call returns (e.g., rule ID). The schema covers parameter details, but the description could be more complete for a creation operation.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for all parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter-level details. It does loosely map 'monitoring targets' to resourceList and 'metrics' to cfgRuleList, but this adds limited meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 and resource: 'Create a Cloud Insight event rule'. It also distinguishes itself from alternatives by noting 'directly specifying monitoring targets and metrics (without pre-created groups)', which clearly separates it from rule-group-based creation tools in the sibling list.

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 this tool: when you want to create an event rule without requiring pre-created groups. This provides clear context for selection, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or list negative use cases.

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