ncloud_change_mongodb_config_count

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe, idempotent behavior. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., effect on running instances, downtime, or success conditions). Given annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not contradict them but adds minimal value.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No redundant or filler content exists; every word earns its place.

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 complexity of changing config servers in a MongoDB sharded cluster (potential impact on cluster availability, configuration requirements), the description is too brief. It does not mention that the change is only applicable to sharded clusters, any waiting period, or that the cluster must be in a certain state. No output schema exists, but the description could explain the return value or side effects.

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%, with descriptions for both parameters: 'Number of config servers' and 'Cloud MongoDB instance number'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is maintained.

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 clearly states the verb 'Change' and the resource 'number of Config servers in a MongoDB Sharded Cluster instance'. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_change_mongodb_secondary_count, ncloud_change_mongodb_mongos_count, and ncloud_change_mongodb_shard_count, which target different aspects of MongoDB clusters.

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 usage when you need to modify the config server count in a MongoDB sharded cluster, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., changing shard count or secondary count). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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