ncloud_kms_update_rotation_period

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether the change takes effect immediately, whether it applies to all key versions, or any side effects. It merely restates the tool's purpose.

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 concise sentence with zero waste. It is front-loaded and immediately communicates the tool's function, achieving high conciseness without missing critical information.

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 two-parameter configuration update, the description is adequate, but it lacks usage context (when to use vs. related tools) and does not mention any return value or post-conditions. With annotations covering safety and schema covering parameters, the description is minimally sufficient but not enriched.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (keyTag and rotationPeriod) having clear descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter detail, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning, making the baseline score of 3 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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('auto rotation period for a KMS key'), clearly stating the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_kms_rotate_key (manual rotation) and ncloud_kms_enable_auto_rotation/disable_auto_rotation by focusing on the period itself.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as enabling/disabling auto rotation or manually rotating a key. It lacks any prerequisites (e.g., whether the key must already have auto rotation enabled) or contextual triggers for invoking this tool.

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