ncloud_kms_create_token_generator

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the 'activate' aspect and the resulting capability. However, it does not disclose full behavioral traits like idempotency, prerequisites (e.g., key must exist), or what happens if a token generator already exists. With annotations covering the destructive profile, this is baseline adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb, and no fluff. Every word contributes to explaining the tool's purpose and effect.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It explains what it does and why. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly stating prerequisites (e.g., the key must already exist) but these are reasonably implied by the reference to a KMS key.

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 provides 100% coverage for the only parameter (keyTag) with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond referencing the KMS key, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action (Create/activate) and the resource (token generator for a KMS key), plus the purpose (enables token-based authentication). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update/get/delete token generator.

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 clear context: it is used to create/activate a token generator for a KMS key to enable token-based authentication. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use update_token_generator instead) or state when not to use it.

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