ncloud_cdss_set_config_group_description

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by stating 'An empty string clears it', which clarifies a key behavioral nuance not present in annotations. Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict these. It could also mention that the operation only affects the description field and not other config settings, but it conveys sufficient behavioral clarity.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the core action ('Change a Config Group's description') and then covers the special case of clearing. Every word earns its place, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description is quite complete. It covers the main action and the edge case (clearing). However, it does not mention whether the operation is idempotent (though idempotentHint annotation covers this) or what the expected return/response might be, which could be useful but is partially covered by annotations.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly noting that an empty string clears the description, which reinforces the schema's note about the 'description' parameter. However, it does not provide additional details about 'configGroupNo' or 'kafkaVersionCode' beyond what their schema descriptions already state, such as source or format specifics.

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 'Change a Config Group's description. An empty string clears it' clearly states the verb (Change), the resource (Config Group's description), and the specific behavior of clearing. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ncloud_cdss_create_config_group and ncloud_cdss_delete_config_group by focusing on the description update operation.

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 the tool is used when updating a config group's description, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ncloud_cdss_get_config_group_detail or ncloud_cdss_create_config_group. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions when this tool should be preferred over others.

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