ncloud_list_nat_gateways

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

The description adds 'in the current region' to the read-only behavior already indicated by annotations (readOnlyHint=true). No further behavioral details (e.g., pagination, return format) are provided, so it adds minimal 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 that covers the essential purpose without any superfluous words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

While the purpose is clear, the description omits details about return values, pagination behavior, and how to combine filters. Given the complexity (13 optional params) and absence of output schema, additional context would improve completeness.

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 the input schema already explains all 13 parameters. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level information, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 'List all NAT Gateway instances in the current region', specifying the action (list), resource (NAT Gateway), and scope (current region). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_nat_gateway_detail or create_nat_gateway.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_nat_gateway_detail for a specific gateway). The description lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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