List Box NAS volumes eligible to receive imported files for a given Datafence and Box, so you can select a valid import target.
List the Box NAS volumes that can receive imported files.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| boxId | Yes | Box number (see ncloud_datafence_list_boxes) | |
| fenceId | Yes | Datafence number (see ncloud_datafence_get_datafence) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. It does add the filtering trait ('can receive imported files'), but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or what the returned entries contain — though for a simple list call that is a modest gap.
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 sentence with the scope constraint front-loaded and zero filler. 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?
For a two-parameter, read-only listing with annotations covering safety and a fully documented schema, the description is sufficient. It could have noted the relationship to the file-import workflow, but nothing essential to calling the tool correctly is missing.
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%: both fenceId and boxId are documented with cross-references to ncloud_datafence_get_datafence and ncloud_datafence_list_boxes. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, 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?
Specific verb (List) plus a precisely scoped resource: Box NAS volumes that can receive imported files. The 'can receive imported files' qualifier distinguishes it from the sibling ncloud_datafence_list_export_source_nas, but it never names or contrasts with that sibling explicitly.
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?
Usage is only implied: the tool clearly serves as the pre-step to a file import, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of the counterpart export-source tool, and no stated preconditions. The agent must infer the call sequence.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.