ncloud_cm2_get_certificate_chain

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

readOnlyHint already covers the safety profile, yet the description still adds substantial behavior: the output format (PEM plus chain), the zone restriction, and a concrete auth failure mode with an HTTP status. This is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot convey.

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, front-loaded with what is returned before the constraints. The verification parenthetical ('confirmed by Ncloud support; verified 2026-10-02') is slightly verbose but justifies a non-obvious auth claim.

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 one-parameter read-only getter with no output schema, the description covers what comes back (PEM + chain) and the conditions required to call it successfully. Nothing material is missing 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?

The single parameter 'certificateNo' is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage) and the description adds nothing about its format or sourcing. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 and resource ('get a certificate ... together with its chain') and adds a concrete scoping qualifier ('PEM form', 'Public zone only'), which helps separate it from generic certificate lookups. It never names an alternative sibling such as ncloud_cm2_download_certificate or ncloud_pca_get_ca_chain, so an agent must still infer the boundary.

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?

Gives real preconditions: public zone only, and a main-account API key is required because Sub Account keys get HTTP 403. That is clear 'when this will work' guidance, though it offers no explicit alternative tool to use when the precondition fails.

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