ncloud_set_desired_capacity

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond restating the function, such as the fact that setting the capacity may immediately trigger scaling activities, or that the value is subject to ASG min/max constraints. It provides no value beyond the annotations.

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, direct sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the simplicity of the operation (two parameters, no nested objects, no output schema) and the presence of helpful annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could briefly mention that the capacity may be constrained by the ASG's min/max settings, but overall it adequately covers the essential information for this low-complexity tool.

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 already provides complete descriptions for both parameters (autoScalingGroupNo and desiredCapacity), so the description adds no additional meaning. Coverage is 100%, which sets the baseline at 3, and the description does not enhance parameter understanding further.

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 'Set the desired capacity for an Auto Scaling Group' uses a specific verb ('set') and a clear resource ('desired capacity for an Auto Scaling Group'), accurately distinguishing it from sibling tools like ncloud_update_asg (which updates broader ASG settings) and ncloud_put_scaling_policy (which configures scaling policies).

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?

No explicit usage guidance is provided. The intended use is implied by the tool name and description (manually adjusting ASG capacity), but there is no mention of when to choose this over alternatives, such as scaling policies or scheduled actions, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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