ncloud_nks_update_node_pool

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

Annotations already declare the tool idempotent and non-destructive. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating what it updates; it does not disclose parameter interactions, prerequisites, or operational implications. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb, clearly communicating the purpose without any unnecessary words.

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 full schema documentation and clear annotations, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation. It could mention parameter selection rules more explicitly, but the schema's description of nodeCount ('required if autoscale disabled') already covers the main constraint.

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 coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the two key parameters (nodeCount and autoscale) but adds no new semantic details beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Update'), the resource ('node pool settings'), and the specific scope ('node count or autoscale') within an NKS cluster. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that update labels, taints, or subnets.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (updating node count or autoscale), but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, such as using ncloud_nks_update_node_pool_label for label updates.

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