ncloud_get_object_acl

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the safe read-only nature, and the description does not contradict it. The description adds only the resource scope ('object in Object Storage') but no extra behavioral details like response format, required permissions, or side effects. This meets the baseline for annotation-backed tools.

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, focused sentence with no redundancy. It efficiently communicates the purpose without wasted words.

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 two-parameter read-only operation with full schema coverage, the description is largely sufficient. It identifies the resource and the action, and the annotation covers safety. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by the clear 'Get ACL' phrasing, though a note about the return format would make it fully 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters (bucketName and objectName) well described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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 operation: 'Get the access control list (ACL) of an object in Object Storage.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the exact resource (object ACL), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ncloud_put_object_acl and ncloud_get_bucket_acl.

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 clear context by specifying 'of an object' and 'Object Storage', implying this is for object-level ACL retrieval rather than bucket-level. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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