ncloud_remove_nic_acg

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

Beyond the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds the crucial behavioral requirement that confirm must be true to execute, which is not part of the annotations. It also provides an explicit warning symbol, reinforcing the destructive nature. However, it does not elaborate on side effects beyond the action itself.

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 a warning emoji, a clear action, and the confirm requirement. Every phrase earns its place; no wasted 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?

For a simple 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the mandatory confirm flag. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance or reference to the complementary ncloud_add_nic_acg tool, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it restates the action and the confirm parameter, which is already fully described in the schema ('Must be true to actually execute the destructive operation'). With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Remove' and the resource 'access control groups (ACGs) from a network interface,' which distinguishes it from related tools like ncloud_add_nic_acg. It also includes the critical safety requirement to set confirm=true, reinforcing the specific action.

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 tool is used when ACGs need to be detached from a network interface, but it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or provide when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance. The sibling ncloud_add_nic_acg exists, but no direct comparison is made.

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