ncloud_kms_encrypt

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

With readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description adds value by noting size limits and key type support. However, it does not disclose the return format (e.g., ciphertext) or note that encryption may produce non-deterministic results, which would be useful behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the verb 'Encrypt', and every word contributes. No redundant or filler content.

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 full schema coverage and an annotation, the description is adequate but incomplete: it does not mention that the output is ciphertext or clarify the role of the 'context' parameter for convergent encryption. Since there is no output schema, some return-value information would improve completeness.

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% description coverage for all three parameters (keyTag, context, plaintext). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already states, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (Encrypt data), the resource (KMS key), and includes specific constraints (up to 32KB, current key version, AES256/RSA2048). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like decrypt or sign.

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 for encryption and provides important constraints (size, key types), but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like ncloud_kms_decrypt or ncloud_kms_sign. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative references.

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