Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud-gov-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_head_object

Read-only

Check object metadata like size and content type in a bucket without downloading the file. Use HEAD requests to quickly verify object properties.

Instructions

Retrieve metadata of an object without returning the object body (HEAD request)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "bucketName": "<bucketName>",
      "objectName": "<objectName>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_head_object"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bucketNameYesName of the bucket
objectNameYesObject key (path) to get metadata for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is safe, and the description adds the key behavioral detail of returning metadata without the object body. However, it does not disclose other relevant behaviors such as potential 404 responses or required permissions. The added context is modest.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The entire description is a single, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key distinction. There is no redundancy or extraneous information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only retrieval tool with two well-documented parameters and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation. It could mention return header details, but this is not critical given the standard HTTP semantics.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for both bucketName and objectName. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and clearly identifies the resource ('metadata of an object') while distinguishing this from body-returning operations via 'without returning the object body (HEAD request)'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like ncloud_get_object and ncloud_list_objects.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implicitly conveys the appropriate use case: when only metadata is needed and the body is not required. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the HEAD request semantics provide clear context for tool selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools