ncloud_gtm_update_profile

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds only that it updates an 'existing' profile, but does not disclose partial vs. full update semantics, potential side effects, or any required permissions beyond what annotations 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, clear sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it highly scannable and efficient.

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 description is too terse to be fully complete. It omits whether updates are partial (only provided fields) or a full replacement, lacks any return value indication (no output schema), and does not clarify how to locate the domainId. While annotations and schema cover safety and parameters, the core update behavior remains ambiguous.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all four parameters (e.g., ttl is 'TTL value in seconds'). The description text adds no additional parameter context, so the schema carries the full burden, meriting the baseline score.

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 ('Update') and the resource ('existing Global Traffic Manager profile (domain)'), distinguishing it from create/delete/list siblings like ncloud_gtm_create_profile and ncloud_gtm_delete_profile. However, it does not enumerate the updatable fields (TTL, policyId, claRegion), which appear only in the schema.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It does not mention related tools such as ncloud_gtm_create_profile or ncloud_gtm_update_policy, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and context.

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