ncloud_list_ddos_events

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds the subscription requirement, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination limits, time range constraints, or return format. With annotations covering the safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and a key prerequisite. Every part is useful, with no redundant 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?

The schema is rich with parameter descriptions, and the annotation confirms read-only behavior. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention the return structure or which parameters are most relevant for filtering. This is adequate but not complete for a tool with 9 parameters.

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 descriptions for 100% of parameters, including units (Unix epoch milliseconds) and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List Anti-DDoS security events from Security Monitoring.' This clearly distinguishes it from other security event list tools like ncloud_list_av_events or ncloud_list_waf_events by explicitly naming the event type and source service.

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 a clear prerequisite ('Only for users subscribed to the Security Monitoring service') but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. The usage is implied through the tool name and event type rather than explicitly contrasting with sibling tools.

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