ncloud_list_postgresql_users

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, and the description is consistent. No additional behavioral context is provided beyond listing users, such as pagination, filtering, or any side effects. The description does not contradict the annotation, but it also does not enrich the agent's understanding beyond what the annotation and basic verb convey.

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, complete sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail. Every word contributes to clarity.

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 operation with one well-documented parameter and a readOnly annotation, the description is largely complete. The only gap is the absence of any detail about the output (though no output schema exists, a brief note about the return format could have been helpful). Overall, it provides enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 covers the single parameter 'cloudPostgresqlInstanceNo' with a clear description 'Cloud PostgreSQL instance number'. The tool description adds no further explanation about the parameter format or constraints. Since schema coverage is 100%, 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 clearly states the operation: 'List users in a Cloud DB for PostgreSQL instance'. It specifies the resource (users), the database type (PostgreSQL), and the action (list). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_list_postgresql_databases and ncloud_list_mysql_users, as it is unambiguous about what is being listed and for which 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 implies when to use the tool: whenever users of a specific PostgreSQL instance need to be listed. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternative tools, such as ncloud_list_postgresql_databases for database listing. The usage context is clear but not formally differentiated.

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