Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud-gov-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_set_protect_termination

Idempotent

Enable or disable termination protection on a server instance to prevent accidental deletion. Specify the instance number and protection setting.

Instructions

Set or unset termination protection on a server instance

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": {
      "serverInstanceNo": "<serverInstanceNo>",
      "isProtectServerTermination": "<isProtectServerTermination>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_set_protect_termination"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serverInstanceNoYesServer instance number
isProtectServerTerminationYesWhether to enable termination protection

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'set or unset' behavior, indicating the tool toggles protection both on and off, which is useful beyond the schema's boolean parameter. This aligns with annotations, 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

A single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No filler, effectively front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema and supportive annotations, the description is sufficient. It fully explains the operation and resource, and the schema covers the parameters.

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%; both parameters have descriptive names and descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter information, so it relies on the schema, which fully documents the two parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Set or unset') and resource ('termination protection on a server instance'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools for other resource types (e.g., block storage, NAS). It precisely conveys the tool's function without ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly implies when to use it: to enable or disable termination protection for a server instance. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific language makes the context obvious and excludes non-server resources.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools