ncloud_kms_rotate_key

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

Annotations are empty, so the description must disclose behavior. It does state the primary effect (creating a new version) and a precondition (enabled key), but omits important details like whether old versions remain usable, permission requirements, or reversibility—leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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?

A single sentence conveys the action, outcome, and a condition with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and immediately clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 mutating KMS operation with no output schema and empty annotations, the description is somewhat minimal. It does not explain side effects on existing key versions, required permissions, or how it relates to automatic rotation, leaving gaps for an agent deciding to invoke it.

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 schema fully describes the sole parameter (keyTag) with coverage at 100%, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 applies since the schema already handles parameter documentation.

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 verb and resource: 'Rotate an active key to create a new version.' It specifies the outcome (new version) and distinguishes this from sibling operations like ncloud_kms_enable_auto_rotation, emphasizing manual key rotation.

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 gives a condition ('Only enabled keys can be rotated') but no explicit guidance on when to use manual rotation versus automatic rotation or other key-management alternatives. It implies context but lacks exclusions or comparisons.

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