ncloud_hadoop_list_notebooks

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals this is a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context—it does not mention filtering options, pagination behavior, return volume, or any limitations. This is a bare 'List' statement that adds no value beyond the annotation.

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 ('List Cloud Hadoop notebook instances') with zero superfluous words. It efficiently captures the core action and resource, making it perfectly sized for a simple list operation.

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 tool is a straightforward list operation with no output schema. While the schema covers parameters and the readOnlyHint annotation is present, the description lacks any mention of what the response contains, whether all notebooks across clusters are returned by default, or any other operational detail. This is adequate but not complete for a tool with multiple optional filters.

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%, with all five parameters (pageNo, pageSize, regionCode, cloudHadoopInstanceNo, cloudHadoopNotebookInstanceNoList) documented in the input schema. The description itself does not elaborate on parameter usage, but since the schema already does, the baseline score of 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('Cloud Hadoop notebook instances'), clearly conveying the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like ncloud_hadoop_get_notebook_detail or other list tools, though the resource type is precise enough to avoid major confusion.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ncloud_hadoop_get_notebook_detail for details, or ncloud_hadoop_list_notebook_buckets for buckets). There is no mention of scenarios that favor this listing operation, leaving the agent to infer usage 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.