ncloud_pipeline_list_sourcedeploy_scenarios

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'List' verb aligns with that. However, it adds no additional behavioral insight such as pagination behavior, filtering, or how scenarios are scoped to a stage beyond what the schema already shows.

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, clear sentence that wastes no words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easily scannable.

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 list operation with fully documented parameters and a read-only annotation, the description is largely sufficient. It does not detail the return structure, but no output schema exists and the context of a listing tool makes the expectation obvious. A brief note about filtering or pagination could improve completeness, but it is not critical.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema; it restates the stage context, but does not clarify relationships between parameters or the semantic meaning of searchWord beyond the schema's 'Filter by scenario name (partial match)'.

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 ('List') with a clear resource ('SourceDeploy scenarios') and scope ('for a project stage'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_pipeline_list_sourcedeploy_stages and ncloud_sourcedeploy_list_scenarios by implying the pipeline project-stage context.

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 usage when needing to list scenarios for a given project stage, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like ncloud_sourcedeploy_list_scenarios or provide exclusion criteria. Context is implied rather than articulated.

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