ncloud_cdss_get_server_spec_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail by warning that G2 codes are rejected, which helps the agent avoid a known failure mode. No contradiction with 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 concise sentences: the first front-loads the operation and scope, the second delivers the critical parameter constraint. There is no filler or redundant restatement.

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 simple one-parameter, read-only lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operational constraint. It does not describe the response shape, but the low complexity and readOnlyHint make the definition sufficient for correct invocation.

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 schema already documents softwareProductCode as a G3 OS image code. The description adds value by explicitly stating that G2 codes from ncloud_cdss_get_os_products are rejected, clarifying a boundary not fully spelled out in the schema.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get available server specs for CDSS (G3/KVM)'. It is specific enough to identify the operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ncloud_cdss_get_node_spec or ncloud_ses_get_server_specs.

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?

It provides clear usage context: softwareProductCode must be a G3 image code, and a G2 code from ncloud_cdss_get_os_products is explicitly rejected. This is actionable guidance, though it does not discuss when to prefer this tool over sibling alternatives.

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