ncloud_remove_process_plugin

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds the explicit warning '⚠️ Destructive' and the requirement 'Set confirm=true to execute', which is essential behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. This helps the agent understand the safety guardrail without relying solely on the schema.

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 two sentences, front-loads the critical destructive warning, and each sentence serves a purpose: stating the action and explaining the prerequisite for execution. 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?

The description covers the essential context for this destructive operation: what it does and the required confirm flag. There is no output schema, but this is a simple mutation tool, and the absence of return-value details is not a significant gap given the clear action and parameters.

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%, with each parameter already described (instanceNo, configList, type, confirm). The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, so it does not exceed the baseline established by the schema.

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 provides a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('process monitoring plugin(s) from a server instance'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like add, set, or list. The action is unambiguous and directly related to the tool name.

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 states the context ('Remove process monitoring plugin(s) from a server instance') and includes a critical usage instruction ('Set confirm=true to execute'). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the destructive nature and confirmation requirement give clear guidance on when this tool is appropriate.

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