ncloud_get_port_plugin

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as what happens if the instance does not exist, whether a default configuration is returned, or what the response contains. It provides no behavioral traits beyond the annotation.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No redundancy or extraneous information—every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose.

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-only getter with one well-described parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient: it identifies the target resource and input. It could be more complete by hinting at the response format, but the tool's simplicity and the existing annotations make it adequate.

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 instanceNo, which is already described as 'Server instance number'. The tool description merely repeats the idea of a 'specific server instance' without adding further semantic detail, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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') and resource ('port monitoring plugin configuration') and scopes it to 'a specific server instance', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_list_port_plugins (listing all) and ncloud_add_port_plugin (adding). It unambiguously communicates the tool's function.

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 the tool is used when you need the port monitoring plugin configuration for a specific server instance, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., list_port_plugins to enumerate all, or add/set to modify). There are no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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