ncloud_cdss_get_node_spec_for_change_g3

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scoping context ('G3/KVM only', 'running CDSS cluster') but does not describe return format, error conditions, or behavior beyond the basic read operation. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 sentences, no fluff, with the core action and scope front-loaded followed by the G2 sibling reference. Every sentence contributes selection-relevant 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?

For a one-parameter, read-only tool with annotations and full schema coverage, this is nearly complete. It clearly scopes to G3/KVM and names the G2 equivalent. The only gap is that it doesn't disambiguate from the similarly named ncloud_cdss_get_node_product_for_change or note that the returned specs may be used directly with ncloud_cdss_change_node_spec.

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 the parameter is well-documented ('Cluster instance number (from ncloud_cdss_list_clusters)'). The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond implying the cluster must be running; per the baseline rule, 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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('server specs a running CDSS cluster's nodes can be changed to'), plus a clear scope qualifier ('G3/KVM only'). It also names the sibling ncloud_cdss_get_node_spec as the G2 equivalent, making the distinction immediate and unambiguous.

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 explicitly names the G2 alternative and implies the condition for choosing this tool (G3/KVM clusters looking up changeable node specs). However, it does not mention other closely related siblings like ncloud_cdss_get_node_product_for_change or ncloud_cdss_get_node_products, so exclusion guidance is incomplete.

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