ncloud_get_cache_instance_detail

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation (true) and does not contradict it. However, it adds no behavioral details beyond the annotation (e.g., no mention of return format, limits, or side effects).

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, clear sentence with no redundant elements. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema, but the description does not describe the return values. For a detail-retrieval tool, some indication of the response structure would improve completeness, though it is acceptable given standard API conventions.

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 schema already describes the parameter ('Cloud Cache instance number to query') with 100% coverage. The description adds no new meaning beyond specifying 'specific'.

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', the resource 'Cloud DB for Cache (Redis/Valkey) instance', and specifies 'detailed information' for a single instance. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_list_cache_instances.

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?

Usage is implied by the context of retrieving details for a specific instance, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., listing tools) or when not to use it.

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