Check the current operational status of a specific Global Edge CDN edge using its edge ID. Use this to monitor edge health or troubleshoot CDN issues.
Get the current operational status of a Global Edge CDN edge
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| edgeId | Yes | Edge ID to check status for |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Input schema / properties / profileIdRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Profile ID that the edge belongs to",
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "profileId",
- "edgeId"
-]New value: +[
+ "edgeId"
+]v1.10.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds the nuance that this returns 'current operational status' (live state rather than configuration), but it does not describe return format, status values, or any auth/rate-limit context.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and resource immediately without padding.
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 one-parameter status getter with no output schema, the description gives the core purpose. However, it omits any usage context and does not explain what the 'operational status' response contains, leaving gaps that could affect correct invocation.
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 single 'edgeId' parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, 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 ('Get') and resource ('current operational status of a Global Edge CDN edge'), making the function clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like ncloud_edge_get_edge or ncloud_edge_get_edge_stats, leaving differentiation to inference.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ncloud_edge_get_edge, ncloud_edge_get_edge_stats, or ncloud_edge_list_edges. Usage is only implied by the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.