ncloud_sourcedeploy_create_scenario

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

The only annotation is destructiveHint=false, which aligns with the create action but adds little. The description does not disclose behavior like idempotency, potential overwrites, required permissions, or what is returned on success. It adds no context beyond the annotation.

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 directly states the tool's purpose with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes meaningful information.

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 complexity of the config object and the lack of an output schema or deeper annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a deployment scenario is, how the config should be structured, or what happens after creation. The tool appears to be part of a larger workflow, but no surrounding context is provided.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline applies. The description itself does not enrich parameter understanding; it merely repeats 'stage' from the schema. The 'config' parameter is a complex nested object, but the schema's description ('source, deployment strategy, commands, etc.') is the only semantic content.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('a new deployment scenario'), with a location qualifier ('in a stage'). This is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like edit_scenario, delete_scenario, and list_scenarios.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites such as needing an existing project and stage. The description only states what it does, not in which context it should be invoked.

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