ncloud_gtm_create_profile

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

The only annotation is destructiveHint=false, which is consistent with the description. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as idempotency, required permissions, or behavior on duplicate names. It does not contradict the annotations, but it also does not go beyond them.

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, front-loaded sentence with a clear verb and resource. There is no redundant or unnecessary wording, making it highly concise for a simple create operation.

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?

The tool is a straightforward create operation with a well-documented schema, but there is no output schema and no additional context about prerequisites, side effects, or success criteria. It meets the minimum viable standard but leaves some gaps for the agent.

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 has 100% description coverage for all four parameters. The description itself adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, merely noting that the profile is a domain, which is already captured in the 'name' parameter description. Baseline 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 action (create) and the resource (a Global Traffic Manager profile, clarified as a domain). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update, delete, list, and get profile.

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. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an existing policy) or when to prefer create over update/delete. The usage is only implied by the verb 'Create'.

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