ncloud_datafence_get_connect_server

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond 'get details' – no note on return shape, whether the connect server must be in a running state, or any scoping constraint. Minimal added value over the annotation.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It is not padded, though the extreme brevity is also the source of its other gaps.

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 simple read-only lookup with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate to invoke the tool. It is missing any indication of what 'details' are returned or how this differs from analogous server-get tools, but nothing critical to a correct call is absent.

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 three parameters (fenceId, boxId, instanceNo) are already documented in the schema, each pointing to a related listing tool. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Get a Box connect server's details'), which is clear. However, it does not distinguish itself from closely related siblings like ncloud_datafence_get_linux_server, get_windows_server, get_tensorflow_server, or get_box_summary, so an agent cannot tell what 'connect server' means relative to those without outside knowledge.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the other datafence 'get_*_server'/'get_box_*' tools, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. The only routing hints come from the schema parameter descriptions (which point to list_boxes, get_datafence, list_box_infra), not the description itself.

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