ncloud_get_object

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds valuable context by specifying that the object content is returned as text, which goes beyond the annotation. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral detail, though it omits potential concerns like binary content or size limits.

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 compact and efficient—two sentences that cover the action, resource, and return value without any redundancy or filler. It is front-loaded with the most critical information.

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 read operation with two well-documented parameters and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is largely complete. It specifies the return type ('as text'), which is especially helpful given no output schema. Minor gaps include lack of details about binary objects or error behavior, but these are not critical for a basic get 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for both parameters ('key' and 'bucketName'), so the schema fully explains each parameter. The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning, matching the baseline expectation when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Get (download)') and clearly identifies the resource ('object from an Object Storage bucket') and the return behavior ('Returns the object content as text'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling operations like head_object (which retrieves metadata) or put_object (which uploads).

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need to download an object's content. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use head_object for metadata'). However, the purpose is self-evident enough that an agent can infer appropriate usage.

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