ncloud_functions_get_activations

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds the 1-month retention window, which is valuable behavioral context. It also specifies the 'all actions' scope, which isn't present in the schema or annotation. No contradictions.

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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and no unnecessary wording.

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 read-only list operation with a full input schema and good annotations, the description covers the key aspects: scope, time window, and read-only nature. It doesn't describe output format or pagination behavior, but those are standard for such tools and not essential given the schema and annotation coverage.

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 already covers all five parameters with descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by indicating a default time window (last 1 month) that the start/end parameters likely filter around, enriching the parameter context beyond the raw schema.

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 identifies the tool's function: retrieving all activation history across all actions, with an explicit time scope of the last month. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_functions_get_action_activations which target individual actions.

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 usage for a broad, cross-action activation log but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool over sibling alternatives like the action-specific or trigger-specific activation tools. There's no exclusion guidance, but the 'all actions' scope provides a clear implied context.

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