ncloud_update_metrics_group

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

The annotations already declare the tool as idempotent and non-destructive, and the description adds that it updates an existing resource, which is consistent. Yet it does not disclose update semantics such as whether metricList replaces existing metrics or merges, or any side effects of partial updates.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the action and target resource, with no redundant or filler content. It is optimally concise and well-structured.

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 tool with a nested metricList parameter and no output schema, the description is somewhat sparse. It covers the basic operation but omits important context such as whether the update is partial or full, prerequisites like the resource existing, and what behavior to expect with the metric list.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema provides, thus a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Update' with a clear resource, 'existing Cloud Insight rule template (metrics group)', which distinguishes it from create/delete/list tools in the sibling set. It also clarifies the terminology by equating 'rule template' with 'metrics group'.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool to modify an existing metrics group as opposed to creating or deleting one. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, and no exclusions or conditional contexts are mentioned.

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