ncloud_ses_get_subnet_list_g3

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this a safe read operation. The description adds the G3/KVM-specific scope and cluster creation context, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or return format. The description aligns with the annotation and introduces no contradiction.

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 of 16 words that immediately conveys the action, resource, and constraint. Every word contributes to meaning, with no redundancy or filler. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify what the return value contains. It says 'available subnet list' but does not explain whether it returns subnet IDs, names, or other fields. It also omits that vpcNo is required to scope the list. For a simple list tool, this is a moderate gap that could lead to uncertainty about the result structure.

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 vpcNo with the description 'VPC number'. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. It does not explain how to obtain the VPC number or how the parameter affects the result, but the schema already covers its meaning.

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 tool's function: retrieving an available subnet list for Search Engine Service cluster creation. It specifically restricts to G3/KVM, which distinguishes it from the sibling ncloud_ses_get_subnet_list tool. This is a specific verb+resource+constraint combination, not a tautology.

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 'G3/KVM only' qualifier implies this is the tool to use when creating a G3/KVM Search Engine Service cluster, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use other tools, stopping short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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