ncloud_set_network_acl_description

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. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the simple 'set or update' action, such as effects on existing rules or whether the description is required to be non-empty. It does not contradict annotations, but provides no additional transparency.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place, with zero redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple update tool with only 2 documented parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering idempotency and destructiveness, the description is fully sufficient. The tool's purpose and required inputs are unambiguous, and no additional context is necessary for correct invocation.

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%, and both parameters are clearly documented ('Network ACL number' and 'New description'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but this is acceptable given the high coverage. Baseline 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 verb ('Set or update') and the resource ('Network ACL description'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_get_network_acl_detail or ncloud_delete_network_acl by specifying exactly what it modifies.

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 implies usage for modifying an existing Network ACL's description, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., using ncloud_set_subnet_network_acl for subnet association, or ncloud_create_network_acl for new ACLs). There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations, but the context is clear enough for basic selection.

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