Skip to main content
Glama
sjk4425

ncloud-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_cdss_upgrade_precheck

Verify if a CDSS Kafka cluster can proceed with a version upgrade by checking target config group and cluster instance details before applying changes.

Instructions

Pre-check whether a CDSS Kafka version upgrade can proceed

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
upgradeConfigGroupNoYesConfig group number for the target version
serviceGroupInstanceNoYesCluster instance number
upgradeKafkaVersionCodeYesTarget Kafka version code (from ncloud_cdss_get_kafka_versions)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.15.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / configGroupNo
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Config group number for the new version",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / kafkaVersionCode
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Target Kafka version code",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / upgradeConfigGroupNo
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Config group number for the target version",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / upgradeKafkaVersionCode
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Target Kafka version code (from ncloud_cdss_get_kafka_versions)",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "serviceGroupInstanceNo",
-  "kafkaVersionCode"
-]New value: +[
+  "serviceGroupInstanceNo",
+  "upgradeKafkaVersionCode",
+  "upgradeConfigGroupNo"
+]
  2. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'pre-check' which suggests a read-only operation, but it doesn't state whether the tool has side effects, what it returns (e.g., a boolean or a list of blockers), or any authentication or prerequisite requirements. For a pre-check tool, the agent needs to know what the result looks like to decide whether to proceed, which is missing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that clearly states the purpose. It's front-loaded and contains no fluff or redundant information. It earns its place perfectly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should indicate what the pre-check returns or how to interpret the result. It doesn't. It also lacks any mention of when to call this in relation to other CDSS operations, potential error conditions, or how the result should influence subsequent actions. For a pre-check tool, this is a significant gap that leaves the agent guessing about the outcome.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% – each parameter has a meaningful description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. Since the schema fully documents the parameters, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description doesn't need to repeat them.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to pre-check whether a CDSS Kafka version upgrade can proceed. It uses a specific verb ('pre-check') and a specific resource ('CDSS Kafka version upgrade'), which distinguishes it from the related upgrade tool (ncloud_cdss_upgrade_version) and status tool (ncloud_cdss_upgrade_status). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast it with those siblings, so it doesn't fully leverage the sibling context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this is a pre-check that should be run before an upgrade, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus the actual upgrade tool or status tool. There's no mention of alternatives or conditions under which this tool should be preferred. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools