ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud_list_subnets

Read-only

List subnets in the current region, filtering by VPC number, subnet name, type, or usage for precise network inventory.

Instructions

List all subnets in the current region

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ncloud_list_subnets"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`vpcNo`	No	Filter by VPC number
`subnetName`	No	Filter by subnet name
`subnetNoList`	No	Filter by subnet numbers
`usageTypeCode`	No	Filter by usage type (GEN, LOADB, BM, NATGW)
`subnetTypeCode`	No	Filter by subnet type (PUBLIC, PRIVATE)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read operation, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds 'all' and 'current region' as scope context, but there is no mention of pagination, response format, or default filter behavior, which would improve transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently states the action, resource, and scope in a compact form.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with readOnly annotation and fully described parameters, the description is adequate. However, the absence of an output schema and lack of details about pagination or response contents leave some gaps, and it doesn't point to related tools like ncloud_get_subnet_detail for detailed lookups.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage across all five optional parameters, so the description doesn't need to elaborate. It adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'List' and resource 'subnets' with a clear scope ('current region'). It distinguishes itself from singular ncloud_get_subnet_detail and service-specific subnet listers by being the general list tool, though it doesn't explicitly state it covers VPC subnets.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'current region' provides clear context for when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on alternatives or exclusions. It doesn't mention ncloud_get_subnet_detail for single-subnet lookups or service-specific subnet listers, leaving the choice somewhat implied.

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

Deploy Server