ncloud_gtm_get_query_count

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation, so the description carries less burden. It adds the context that the data is 'time-series monitoring data,' which implies a temporal aggregation. However, it does not disclose details like filtering behavior, default domain selection, or response format beyond what the schema and annotation imply.

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 directly states the tool's function. No redundant words or filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 query tool with a fully documented schema and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is adequate. However, the absence of an output schema means the description should hint at return value structure; 'time-series monitoring data' is a minimal hint. It lacks details on how to interpret the data or specify a time range beyond baseTimeUnit.

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%, with both parameters documented in the input schema. The description itself adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. The baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles the parameter documentation fully.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('GTM domain (profile) query count time-series monitoring data'). It identifies this as a monitoring data retrieval tool specific to GTM domains, which distinguishes it from other monitoring tools like ncloud_dns_get_query_count. However, it could be more explicit about the output type or that it returns a time series.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. Given the large number of sibling tools (e.g., ncloud_cdss_get_monitoring, ncloud_ses_get_monitoring), the lack of any usage direction is a significant gap.

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