ncloud_pca_create_ocsp

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

The description discloses that the tool deploys the URL to existing certificates, which is a side-effect beyond the annotation's non-destructive hint. It does not mention whether existing OCSP settings are overwritten, idempotency, or any prerequisites. The annotation only confirms non-destructive, so the description adds some behavioral context but not rich detail.

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 sentence that is immediately informative and free of redundant wording. It front-loads the primary action and avoids verbose explanations, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides the core purpose but leaves out operational details like what the API returns, prerequisites, or how to verify success. The lack of an output schema increases the burden on the description to explain outcomes, which it does not fully address. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-level details beyond 'caTag' and 'ocspServers' already described in the schema. The mention of deploying to certificates indirectly ties the parameters together, but no new semantic information is provided.

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 identifies the action (create OCSP) and the resource scope (deploy URL to certificates of this CA). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_pca_delete_ocsp by specifying creation and deployment. The verb 'Create' and the target 'OCSP' are unambiguous.

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 the use case (setting up OCSP for a CA) but does not provide explicit alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools like ncloud_pca_delete_ocsp exist, but no guidance is given on when to choose one over the other. However, the context is clear enough that an agent can infer the appropriate scenario.

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