ncloud_list_policies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the scope of 'all available' but does not disclose that results are paginated or that filters exist (both are visible in the schema). It provides modest additional context beyond the annotation but lacks details about response structure or pagination behavior.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 list tool with all parameters self-documented in the schema and read-only annotations, the description is adequate. It names the exact resource ('IAM policies') and implies a list operation. However, the absence of an output schema and any mention of pagination or return format leaves some gaps, but these are minor for a straightforward listing tool.

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%, meaning all five parameters already have descriptive text. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is 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 'List all available IAM policies' uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('IAM policies'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ncloud_gtm_list_policies and ncloud_drm_list_policies. It precisely states what the tool does.

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 clearly scopes usage to IAM policies, making it obvious this is for IAM rather than GTM or DRM policies. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool over similar policy-listing tools.

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