ncloud_get_log_count_by_period

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is known. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as aggregation behavior, return format, default region behavior, or rate limits, leaving structured fields to carry the disclosure burden.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. It is appropriately sized for a simple read-only count 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?

The schema is fully described and annotations cover the safety profile, but the description does not route the agent among sibling log-count tools or clarify expected output. It is minimally adequate rather than complete for choosing this tool over alternatives.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including time formats, interval examples, and region defaults. The description adds only the high-level notion of a time interval, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource (get log counts) and scopes it to a time interval in Cloud Log Analytics. It is clearer than a tautology, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as ncloud_get_log_count_total, ncloud_get_log_count_recent, and ncloud_get_log_count_by_type.

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?

Provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the related log-count tools. The phrase 'over a time interval' implies period-based counting, but the description does not state exclusions or alternatives.

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