ncloud_hadoop_get_cluster_detail

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose what kind of details are returned, potential exceptions, or any side effects (though none are expected). Since annotations cover the safety profile and the description adds nothing beyond a generic 'get' statement, the contribution to behavioral transparency is 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 sentence that is front-loaded and free of unnecessary words. It serves its purpose without extraneous information, achieving high efficiency with no waste.

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 getter with two parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but does not elaborate on what 'detailed information' includes. Since there is no output schema to explain return values, the description could have been more explicit about the response contents, but the tool name and purpose make it sufficiently clear for this complexity level.

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 'regionCode' and 'cloudHadoopInstanceNo' having descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description does not compensate for any missing schema details, but none are missing.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific Cloud Hadoop cluster' clearly identifies the action (get), the resource (Cloud Hadoop cluster), and the scope ('specific'), effectively distinguishing it from listing tools like ncloud_hadoop_list_clusters. This matches the verb-resource-scope ideal and differentiates from siblings.

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 usage (retrieve details for a specific cluster) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, such as listing clusters first to obtain the instance number. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, making the guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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