ncloud_kms_get_acl_rule_list

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

The description adds no behavioral traits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not disclose any specific behavior such as what the list contains, ordering, pagination, or error conditions. The annotation already signals read-only, and the description merely confirms that with 'Get,' offering no additional transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource. There is no redundant or unnecessary wording, and every word contributes meaning, making it an excellent example of conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple with one required parameter, and the description conveys the core function. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not describe the structure of the returned list (e.g., rule fields like IP, action, description). It also omits edge cases or prerequisites, making it adequate but not fully complete.

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% with keyTag described as 'unique identifier derived from key name.' The description does not add any extra meaning about the parameter, such as how to derive it or any format requirements. Since coverage is high, baseline is 3, and no value is added beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource: 'the list of IP ACL rules configured for a KMS key.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_kms_add_acl_rule and ncloud_kms_delete_acl_rule, which perform mutations, and it leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is read-only or that to modify rules one should use add_acl_rule/delete_acl_rule. It only states what it does, not when to choose it, leaving the agent without clear usage direction.

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