ncloud_execute_policy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., immediate capacity changes), prerequisites (e.g., that the policy must exist), idempotency, or whether the operation is asynchronous. This is a significant gap for a state-changing action.

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 immediately conveys the action and target. No filler or redundant information, making it highly efficient.

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?

This is a simple tool with two fully described parameters, and the description adequately states what it does. However, without an output schema or annotations, it lacks details about the expected result, potential errors, or post-execution behavior, leaving some context gaps for an agent.

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 already provides descriptions for both parameters (policyName and autoScalingGroupNo), covering 100% of the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema offers, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'execute' and the resource 'scaling policy' for an Auto Scaling Group, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list, put, and delete scaling policies. The inclusion of 'manually' further clarifies the action's nature.

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 phrase 'Manually execute' gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate – triggering a policy by hand rather than relying on automatic scaling. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving some room for interpretation.

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