ncloud_get_log_export_history

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

With readOnlyHint=true the safety profile is already covered by annotations, but the description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say what the history records (past export jobs, their statuses, destinations), whether results are paginated, or how region scoping affects visibility. For a history-listing tool, this leaves the behavior essentially opaque.

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 filler or redundancy. It is efficiently structured, though its brevity stems partly from under-specification rather than deliberate economy.

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?

A read-only list tool with three optional, well-documented parameters and no output schema, so nothing critical is missing per the structural data. However, the description never explains what the returned history contains or how it relates to the export siblings, leaving the agent with a gap that annotations and schema cannot fill.

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 pageNo, pageSize, and regionCode are fully documented in the schema with ranges and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is acceptable at the baseline but earns no extra credit.

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 states a verb and resource ("Get the log export history"), but it is close to a restatement of the tool name and adds only the domain qualifier "in Cloud Log Analytics." It does not distinguish this from related siblings like ncloud_export_logs or ncloud_list_export_buckets, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which of the export-family tools to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as ncloud_export_logs (which triggers exports) or ncloud_list_export_buckets. The agent is left to infer the correct context 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.