ncloud_get_cost_relation_code_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns mappings, which is mild behavioral context. No contradictory information, but it does not expand on potential nuances like data volume or response structure.

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 concise with two sentences, no extraneous words. It front-loads the primary purpose and adds a use-case hint. However, it could be slightly expanded 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (read-only, optional params, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It communicates the core function, but lacks details on how parameters filter results, the cardinality of the mapping, or how it compares to other billing tools.

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%, with each parameter clearly described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond listing the mapping types (contract types, product item kinds, etc.), which are already implied by the parameter names and descriptions. 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 tool retrieves a cost relation code list mapping various billing code types. It uses specific verbs and resources ('Get cost relation code list'), but does not differentiate from sibling cost-related tools like ncloud_get_price_list or ncloud_get_product_list, which could cause confusion.

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. It only notes it is 'useful for understanding billing code relationships' but lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparison with sibling tools.

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