ncloud_kms_sign

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds size limits and key type constraints. No contradictions. The description provides useful behavioral context beyond 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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second adds constraints. No unnecessary words; information is front-loaded and well-structured.

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?

Covers main purpose, data size, and key type restrictions. No output schema exists, but the output is standard for signing operations. Could mention prerequisites (key existence, permissions) but still adequate for a simple parameterized tool.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described. The description repeats the size limit from the schema for 'data' and states keyTag derivation, but adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the verb 'generate' and resource 'digital signature', with constraints (data size up to 8KB, supported key types RSA2048/ECDSA). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like encrypt, decrypt, or verify.

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 implies usage for signing data but does not explicitly state when to use or not use it compared to alternatives like ncloud_kms_verify. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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