ncloud_kms_disable_key

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the key behavioral detail that the key becomes unusable for cryptographic operations. This goes beyond the annotations, although it does not discuss reversibility or implications for existing operations. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the consequence. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or vague phrasing.

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 tool with a single required parameter, full schema coverage, and safe annotations (non-destructive, idempotent), the description adequately explains the purpose and effect. It omits explicit mention of reversibility or return value, but these are not critical for this simple operation.

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 coverage is 100%: keyTag is described as a unique identifier derived from key name. The description does not add any further parameter information, so it provides no extra value beyond the schema, which is the baseline case.

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 ('Disable an active KMS key') and its functional effect ('Disabled keys cannot be used for cryptographic operations'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like ncloud_kms_enable_key and ncloud_kms_delete_key by specifying the exact operation on the key.

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 a context for use (when a key needs to be made inactive) and states a consequence, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over related actions like enable, delete, or request deletion. No exclusions or alternatives are referenced.

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