ncloud_get_mongodb_image_products

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals this is a safe read operation, lowering the bar. The description adds the word 'available' but does not explain behavior such as whether regionCode filters results, what happens when omitted, or whether all regions are listed. Since annotations cover the safety profile, a mid-range score is appropriate.

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 one concise sentence that states the operation and the subject clearly. There is no tangential information, and the key information is front-loaded at the beginning.

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 simple list tool with a single optional parameter and a read-only annotation, the description is adequate. It does not explain output format or how the result is used, but the tool's scope is narrow and the purpose is evident from the name and description. Slight deduction for not mentioning the relationship between regionCode and results.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter (regionCode), so the schema fully documents the parameter. The description does not add any parameter-specific context beyond what the schema already provides, which aligns with the baseline score of 3.

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 'List available MongoDB image product codes' uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the exact resource ('MongoDB image product codes'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_get_mongodb_products and ncloud_get_mysql_image_products by naming the database type and the specific data being retrieved.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or why one would need image product codes. With many related MongoDB tools (e.g., ncloud_get_mongodb_products, ncloud_get_mongodb_target_vpcs), the lack of contextual usage guidance is a notable gap.

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