ncloud_databox_apply_file_import

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them with the batch/volume caps (5 files, 500 MB each) and the dryRun preview behavior, which an agent cannot infer from structured fields alone.

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?

Two tight sentences: the core action and its limits come first, the preview tip second. Nothing is redundant and nothing needs reordering.

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 request-submitting tool with no output schema, the description never says what happens after the request is accepted (e.g., whether the result must be polled via ncloud_databox_get_import_request) or whether the call is synchronous. Limits and the dryRun flag are covered, but the post-invocation flow is left to inference.

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 documents all five parameters, making 3 the baseline. The description only restates the dryRun meaning and adds the 500 MB ceiling that the schema does not mention, which is marginal added value.

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 gives a specific verb (import) with an explicit source (Object Storage bucket) and target (Data Box NAS), plus concrete limits. It is not merely a restatement of the name. It stops short of distinguishing itself from the very similar ncloud_datafence_create_file_import, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

"Use dryRun=true to preview" is a useful operational hint, but it is parameter guidance rather than when-to-use/when-not guidance. There is no mention of prerequisites, sequencing with ncloud_databox_list_buckets/nas, or alternatives, so usage is only implied.

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