ncloud_get_login_alias

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read, so the description's burden is lower. It adds useful domain context (the alias is an account-level key surfaced in the sub-account console URL) but discloses no auth requirements, scoping, or return-format behavior.

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 waste, and the parenthetical is a genuine clarification of an otherwise ambiguous term rather than filler. Slightly compressed, but complete.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only getter with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema to explain, this is nearly enough; only the scoping (which sub-account's alias) is left unaddressed, which is a minor gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is no parameter meaning for the description to add or omit.

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 ('Get') and resource ('sub-account login alias'), and the parenthetical defines exactly what the alias is (account-level login access key used in the sub-account console URL). This clearly contrasts with the set_login_alias sibling, though it never names alternatives explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the read-only getter form: call it to retrieve the alias. There is no explicit statement of when to use it versus the setter sibling or any other access-key tool, and no prerequisites noted.

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