ncloud_drm_copy_policy

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses meaningful mutation behavior: the copy is named 'Copy_<original>' and receives a new policyId, and the zone restriction. It does not state whether all policy settings are inherited, what permissions are required, or reversibility.

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 compact sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the endpoint and naming behavior appended. No wasted text.

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 single-param mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials (endpoint, zone restriction, naming, new ID) but leaves open what the copy inherits and how success/failure surfaces. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents policyId. The description reinforces that policyId is the source being duplicated and that a new ID is generated, adding marginal meaning over the schema's own 'policy ID to duplicate'.

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 (Duplicate) and resource (DRM policy), plus the underlying endpoint, clearly distinguishing it from ncloud_drm_create_policy and ncloud_drm_update_policy. The naming/id outcome makes the operation unambiguous.

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 'Public zone only' constraint implicitly scopes usage, but nothing explicitly contrasts copy versus create_policy or explains when to duplicate instead of creating fresh. It provides implied rather than explicit guidance.

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