ncloud_get_product_price_list

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the bar is lower; the description still adds genuine behavioral context: server-side sorting by productCode for stable pagination, default page size, the totalRows/returnedRows/hasMore/nextPageNo response signals, and the truncated=true edge case. That is real pagination behavior an agent needs and cannot get from annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and returned fields, then the pagination contract. It is a single dense sentence plus a dash clause; slightly verbose on pagination bookkeeping but every element is actionable and there is no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description reasonably carries the return-shape burden, and it does so by naming the pricing fields and the pagination envelope. With annotations covering safety and the schema covering all parameters, the only remaining gap is guidance on choosing this tool over sibling pricing tools.

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 every one of the 10 parameters (including detailLevel, productName matching, and the VM/BM item kind codes) is already documented in the schema. The description restates the 50/page default and productCode sort but adds no new parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 clear verb+resource (get product and price list) and enumerates what is returned: monthly/hourly rates, conditions, and discount details. However, it never distinguishes itself from notable siblings such as ncloud_get_price_list, ncloud_get_product_list, or ncloud_get_product_demand_cost_list, so an agent still has to guess which pricing tool 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?

The description explains how to page through results but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternative tools, despite several overlapping price/product listing siblings in the toolset. An agent is left to infer selection criteria entirely.

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