ncloud_set_member_server_image_sharing

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

The annotations provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds valuable behavior: 'replaces existing permissions', indicating that the entire permission list is overwritten. This is useful context beyond the annotations and does not contradict them.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, and includes a parenthetical clarification. There is zero wasted text.

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 only 2 parameters, full schema coverage, and clear annotations, the description covers the essential operation and its replacement behavior. It doesn't mention response format or prerequisites, but for a simple set operation with no output schema, these are less critical. The description is complete enough for most use cases.

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 both parameters fully described (memberServerImageInstanceNo, targetLoginIdList). The tool description itself does not add additional parameter semantics; it relies on the schema, which is adequate. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('Set sharing permission') and target resource ('member server image'), while adding the key qualifier '(replaces existing permissions)' that distinguishes it from sibling tools like add/remove sharing. This makes the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 phrase 'replaces existing permissions' implies this tool is for full replacement rather than incremental add/remove operations, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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