ncloud_list_cache_config_groups

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation, so the bar is lower. The description adds the 'all' scope (no filtering), but does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or whether results are paged by default. This is similar to the get_calls example but slightly less informative.

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 with no wasted words. It conveys the action and resource efficiently.

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 read-only list with two optional pagination parameters, the description is minimally viable. However, it lacks explicit mention of pagination or what the response contains, and with no output schema, the agent must infer return structure. The readOnly annotation helps, but the description does not go beyond the bare minimum.

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%: both pageNo and pageSize have descriptions ('Page number for pagination' and 'Page size for pagination'). The description adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline of 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 'List all Cloud Cache config groups' clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Cloud Cache config groups'), and the word 'all' specifies scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_list_cache_instances and ncloud_list_cache_users by naming the exact resource type.

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 related tools (e.g., list cache instances, list cache backups) or specify conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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