ncloud_nks_get_ip_acl

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no mention of what the configuration includes, any preconditions, or response format. It simply restates the tool's purpose without revealing any additional traits.

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 filler. Every word carries meaning, making it appropriately concise for a simple read operation.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only annotation, no output schema), the description is largely sufficient. However, it does not specify what the IP ACL configuration contains or what the response will look like, which would be useful without an output schema. A 4 reflects this minor gap.

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% (clusterUuid is described as 'UUID of the cluster'), so the schema fully documents the only parameter. The description does not add any extra semantic detail, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 'Get IP ACL configuration for an NKS cluster' uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies a precise resource ('IP ACL configuration') and scope ('NKS cluster'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool ncloud_nks_set_ip_acl, which modifies the configuration, and from other NKS getters like ncloud_nks_get_cluster.

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 the complementary setter ncloud_nks_set_ip_acl, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The agent must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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