ncloud_functions_get_trigger_activation_detail

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context, stating it retrieves 'detailed information' but not elaborating on what that includes or any side effects. Given the annotation coverage, the description adds limited value beyond confirming the operation type.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence of 10 words that front-loads the purpose. It is efficient and avoids unnecessary detail, though it could be slightly expanded to improve completeness without losing conciseness.

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?

Without an output schema, the description fails to explain what 'detailed information' includes, such as status, timestamps, or activation properties. For a detail retrieval tool with two required parameters, more context about the response would help the agent assess its usefulness. The description is too sparse for complete decision-making.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions (platform, triggerName, activationId). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies. No extra context about formats or constraints is given.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a specific trigger activation', making the purpose straightforward. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like ncloud_functions_get_trigger_activations (list) or ncloud_functions_get_action_activation_detail, which reduces clarity in distinguishing between related tools.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. For a tool that retrieves details for a specific activation, it would benefit from mentioning that it requires a known triggerName and activationId, and that it is meant for single-item retrieval rather than listing.

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