ncloud_get_servers_top

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds the 'top 5' limit and the monitoring source, but does not disclose return format, ordering behavior, or any potential limitations. This goes slightly beyond annotations but remains minimal.

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 that conveys the action, resource, metric types, and source without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and immediately understandable.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly: it specifies the metric types and the top-5 nature. It could mention return format or sorting order, but these are not critical for such a straightforward read operation.

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 schema covers 100% of parameter semantics with an enum and description. The description essentially rephrases the metricType values (CPU, memory, filesystem) but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific action ('Get the top 5 servers') with a defined resource type (servers) and scope (CPU, memory, or filesystem usage from Cloud Insight monitoring). It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like ncloud_list_servers which lists all servers, while this focuses on top-ranked ones.

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 clear usage context: it is for ranking servers by a given metric to get the top 5. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use ncloud_list_servers or monitoring query tools instead.

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