ncloud_get_flow_log_config

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

The description adds no behavioral insights beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. While consistent with the read-only nature, it does not disclose any additional traits like pagination, rate limits, or result 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 two sentences, no wasted words, and immediately states the core function. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool.

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 (one optional param, no output schema), the description covers basic behavior but lacks details on what attributes the configuration list includes. It is 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 baseline is 3. The description merely restates the filtering behavior implied by the parameter, adding no new semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 'FlowLog configuration list' and mentions behavior (returns all or filtered by network interface). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like enable_flow_log and disable_flow_log, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., when to use get vs. enable/disable, or how this differs from other 'get' tools). Agents would need to infer usage from context.

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