ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud_set_deny_allow_group_ips

Idempotent

Set the IP list for a Network ACL Deny-Allow Group to manage allowed and denied network traffic.

Instructions

Set the IP list for a Network ACL Deny-Allow Group

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "networkAclDenyAllowGroupNo": "<networkAclDenyAllowGroupNo>",
      "ipList": "<ipList>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_set_deny_allow_group_ips"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ipList`	Yes	List of IP addresses to set for the Deny-Allow Group
`networkAclDenyAllowGroupNo`	Yes	Deny-Allow Group number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no extra behavioral context. It does not disclose that setting the IP list likely overwrites the entire list, which is a critical operational detail for a 'set' operation. The absence of this information makes the behavior ambiguous.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, focused sentence that communicates the core purpose with no redundancy or unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and immediately front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple (two params, no output schema) and the schema covers parameter descriptions. However, the description fails to mention that the IP list is likely replaced in full, and it lacks guidance on when to use this tool relative to other deny-allow group operations. This leaves some gaps for an agent needing to understand the full effect and context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter texts for both networkAclDenyAllowGroupNo and ipList. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so it relies on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Set') and the resource ('IP list for a Network ACL Deny-Allow Group'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ncloud_set_deny_allow_group_desc or CRUD operations on deny-allow groups. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when one needs to set a deny-allow group's IP list, but it does not explicitly say when to use it over alternatives or mention that it replaces the existing list. There is no guidance on context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer.

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

Deploy Server