ncloud_get_root_password_list

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a read operation, and the description's 'List' is consistent with that. The description adds minimal behavioral context (the resource being listed) but does not disclose any additional traits such as pagination behavior, what 'can retrieve root password' implies (e.g., permission requirements), or how results are returned. No contradiction with annotations.

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, direct sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the main verb and object, making it easy to parse quickly. Despite being short, it conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary elaboration, which is appropriate for this simple tool.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (3 optional params, readOnly annotation, no output schema), the description provides the core what-it-does statement. However, it lacks broader context about how this fits into the workflow (e.g., typically used before ncloud_get_root_password), what 'can retrieve root password' means operationally, and whether the list is all instances or only those with accessible passwords. The schema covers parameter details, so the description is minimally adequate but not fully contextual.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters (pageNo, pageSize, rootPasswordServerInstanceNoList), so the schema itself provides clear semantics. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, such as default values, parameter relationships, or formatting expectations, thus meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 ('List') and resource ('server instances that can retrieve root password'), which clearly indicates the tool's function. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'ncloud_get_root_password' by focusing on listing eligible instances rather than retrieving a password, though it could be more explicit about that contrast.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'ncloud_get_root_password'. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical workflow (e.g., list instances first, then retrieve password), or whether filtering by server instance numbers is for narrowing results. The description leaves usage context entirely to inference.

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