ncloud_create_subnet

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

The description repeats the dryRun behavior already documented in the schema parameter. With destructiveHint=false provided in annotations, the description adds no new behavioral transparency beyond what structured data already communicates.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and a useful dryRun tip. Every word earns its place with no 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?

The schema fully documents parameters, but the description does not mention return values, prerequisites (e.g., existing VPC, CIDR constraints), or failure behavior. For a simple create tool with rich schema, this is adequate but not complete.

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 8 parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already carries the full explanatory burden.

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), the resource (subnet), and the context (in a VPC), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like ncloud_nks_add_subnet, but the core intent is unambiguous.

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 only usage guidance is the dryRun tip, which explains how to preview without creating. There is no mention of when to prefer this tool over alternatives, prerequisites like an existing VPC, or scenarios where it should not be used.

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