ncloud_get_route_table_subnets

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'List subnets' is consistent. The description adds the scoping detail of a 'specific route table' but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like response format, pagination, or error conditions, which is acceptable given the simple read-only nature.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and object. It contains no redundant or filler content and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 list tool with one parameter and readOnlyHint annotation, the description adequately covers purpose and scope. 'List subnets' implies the return value is a list, and without an output schema, no further return details are required. The description is complete enough for this low-complexity tool.

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% — the parameter routeTableNo is already described as 'Route table number' in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, 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 uses a specific verb 'List' with resource 'subnets' scoped by 'associated with a specific route table', clearly indicating the operation. It distinguishes from sibling mutation tools like ncloud_add_route_table_subnet and ncloud_remove_route_table_subnet, as well as ncloud_get_routes which returns routes rather than subnets.

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 context: use this tool when you need to see which subnets are attached to a route table. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as referencing sibling tools for adding/removing subnets or noting that route table detail might contain similar info.

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