ncloud_get_log_count_by_period

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, which the description does not contradict. However, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the schema, not explaining what 'counts' entails (e.g., aggregation, output format) or indicating 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the key action. It is efficient but might benefit from additional structural details to improve clarity without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite high schema coverage and readOnly annotations, the description lacks crucial context about the output (e.g., structure of log counts) and how it differs from sibling log count tools. This ambiguity could impair an agent's decision-making.

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 input schema provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for all four parameters. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 log counts over a time interval, specifying the verb and resource. The name 'by_period' and description align, distinguishing it from other log count tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_log_count_total'.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or describe prerequisites or typical use cases, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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