ncloud_pca_get_crl_config

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and the description's 'Get' is consistent, so there's no contradiction. However, the description adds no further behavioral context such as return format, specific fields, or prerequisites. It mostly restates the tool's purpose, providing minimal additional transparency beyond the annotation.

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. It immediately states the action and resource, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple (one required param, read-only) and the description sufficiently conveys what it does. However, without an output schema, it doesn't specify the exact response fields (e.g., interval value and units), so it's not maximally complete.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for the single parameter caTag with its own description 'CA tag value'. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, so baseline 3 applies because the schema already fully documents the parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the exact resource ('CRL update interval configuration') scoped to a Private CA. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_pca_get_ca_crl (gets the actual CRL) and ncloud_pca_update_crl_config (updates the config).

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 context is clear: use this to fetch CRL update interval settings. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the wording naturally differentiates it from related PCA tools. The agent can infer usage from the precise resource name.

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