ncloud_get_routes

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint: true, and the description's 'List' verb is consistent with that. The description adds the scope 'all routes', but doesn't disclose pagination, response format, or other behavioral details. With the read-only annotation present, the description adds some value but not rich context.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 list tool with two well-documented parameters and a read-only annotation, the description and schema cover the essential context. It doesn't describe return values, but since there's no output schema and the tool's purpose is straightforward, this is 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%: both vpcNo and routeTableNo have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description doesn't add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for these parameters, so a 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 uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'routes', and scopes it to 'a specific route table'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_add_route, ncloud_remove_route, and ncloud_list_route_tables, which either mutate routes or list different entities.

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 clearly implies usage when you need all routes in a particular route table. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource type ('routes' vs 'route tables' or 'subnets') makes the intended use evident.

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