ncloud_get_product_schema

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds that the schema includes 'metrics and dimensions,' which is useful context, but it does not disclose return format, pagination, required permissions, or any other behavioral traits. Since annotations cover the safety profile, a score of 3 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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action ('Get') and includes the essential context without redundancy.

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 getter with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It clearly identifies the target (product schema) and the domain (Cloud Insight). However, it could optionally mention that the response contains the schema details, but this is already implied by 'schema definition.' No major gaps exist for a tool of this complexity.

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%: both cw_key and prodName have descriptions in the input schema. The tool description itself does not add any parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 tool's function: 'Get the schema definition for a specific product in Cloud Insight (metrics and dimensions).' It uses a specific verb ('get'), names the resource ('product schema'), and specifies the context ('Cloud Insight'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_get_schema_keys, which focuses on keys rather than full schema definitions.

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 when you need a product's schema (e.g., 'for a specific product'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor provide any exclusions or prerequisites. No additional guidance about selecting this over related tools like ncloud_get_schema_keys or ncloud_get_product_list is offered.

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