ncloud_cdss_enable_public_domain

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by warning about the deprecation timeline and discontinuation risk, which is beyond the annotations. It does not elaborate on side effects, but given the annotations, this is sufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states the primary action, the second provides valuable deprecation context. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 single-parameter action with annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete. It might benefit from mentioning that it applies to a specific cluster instance, but that is clear from the parameter. The deprecation warning is a strong addition. Minor lack of return/effect details, but no output schema exists to mandate that.

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% and the sole parameter 'serviceGroupInstanceNo' is described as 'Cluster instance number'. The description does not add additional semantic detail, but it does not need to; the schema already fully documents the parameter.

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?

States a specific action ('Enable public domain') on a specific resource ('CMAK management tool access'). The context about CMAK being phased out further distinguishes this operation and clarifies its scope.

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 when to use (enabling public domain) but does not explicitly contrast with the sibling disable_public_domain or any alternatives. The deprecation warning offers contextual guidance but no explicit when/when-not.

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