ncloud_get_coin_history_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with read-only by stating 'Returns'. However, the description adds no behavioral traits beyond annotations, such as pagination behavior, data freshness, or any 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?

Single clear sentence with no fluff. Efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail.

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?

While no output schema exists, the description hints at return structure (balance, usage history, status). Missing context on pagination, ordering, error handling, or typical usage patterns. Adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning or context for parameters beyond what is in the schema. 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 'Get', resource 'coin history list', and returns 'coin balance, usage history, and status'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings as the only coin-related list tool, though it does not explicitly differentiate from other history/list tools in the sibling set.

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?

No guidance on when to use or avoid this tool, nor alternatives. The description only implies usage for querying coin history, but lacks context on filtering prerequisites or when to apply specific parameters like 'isPartner' or 'memberNoList'.

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