ncloud_change_block_storage_size

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

Annotations declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds real operational context beyond that: increase-only semantics, the reason a resize may be blocked (attached volume + running server). It stops short of describing async/return behavior, but the added constraints and precondition are substantive.

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?

Three tight sentences that are front-loaded with the core action, then the exclusion, then the precondition. Every clause carries distinct, decision-relevant information with no redundant filler.

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 mutation tool with complete parameter coverage and no output schema, the definition covers scope, constraints, and preconditions well. It does not mention whether the operation is asynchronous or what it returns, which is a minor gap but not needed 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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the size range, 10 GB increments, and 'greater than current size', so the description largely restates structured data. No additional parameter meaning (e.g., regionCode behavior) is added, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (Resize) and resource (Gen2/XEN block storage volume) and names the dedicated endpoint. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling ncloud_change_block_storage by limiting scope to XEN volumes, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance: names the alternative tool (ncloud_change_block_storage) for KVM/Gen3 volumes and states the operational precondition that an attached volume must have its server stopped. Both the exclusion and the alternative are spelled out, leaving nothing to inference.

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