ncloud_create_rule_directly

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

Annotations only provide destructiveHint: false. The description simply says 'Create', which is a write operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions required, or whether it is idempotent. It adds minimal value beyond the tool's name.

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 efficient sentence with no unnecessary words. It could be more structured (e.g., listing key parameters), but it remains concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters (4 required) with nested objects, yet the description does not explain how to construct resourceList or cfgRuleList, nor does it mention return values (no output schema). This is insufficient for a complex creation tool.

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 the schema already explains all parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond stating the approach. 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'Cloud Insight event rule', and distinguishes from alternatives by specifying 'directly specifying monitoring targets and metrics (without pre-created groups)'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like ncloud_create_rule_group.

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 hints at when to use this tool by emphasizing direct specification without groups, implying an alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list specific alternative tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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