ncloud_functions_invoke_trigger

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the return value (activationId) and a specific error case (80512 when no action is linked). While it doesn't cover all possible failure modes or async behavior, it provides meaningful information for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the error condition and return value are efficiently communicated.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the core action, return value, and one key failure condition. It doesn't describe other potential errors or permissions, but these are not critical for a basic trigger invocation. The platform restriction is already in the schema.

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%; all parameters (triggerName, params, platform) are documented in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, but it doesn't need to. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'fire', the resource 'trigger', and the effect 'so its linked actions run'. It also mentions the return value (activationId) and a specific error condition with code 80512, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list/get triggers.

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 implies the use case: manually invoking a trigger to run linked actions. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., invoking an action directly) or provide any exclusion criteria. The failure condition is mentioned, but no comparative guidance is given.

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