ncloud_functions_get_activations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by naming the returned fields (activationId, duration, status, totalCount) and the one-month retention window, but it says nothing about pagination interaction with totalCount or how the default window is computed.

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?

One front-loaded sentence stating the resource, scope, and returned fields with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully enumerates return fields and the time bound, and all five parameters are documented in the schema. For a read-only list tool this is nearly complete, though the lack of sibling disambiguation against per-action/per-trigger activation tools leaves a small 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters including start/end timestamps, pageNo/pageSize, and the platform enum. The description only restates the one-month window that the schema's start default already implies, so it adds little beyond the schema baseline.

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 and resource ('List all action activations') and adds meaningful scope ('across the account from the last month'). This distinguishes it from the account-wide vs. per-action variants hinted at by sibling names, but it never names the close sibling ncloud_functions_get_action_activations, so the routing is left 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?

The phrase 'across the account' implies this is the broad, unfiltered listing, which gives an implicit sense of when to use it versus an action-scoped variant. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative, so the guidance is only implied.

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