ncloud_list_policies

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral insights (e.g., pagination behavior, rate limits, or side effects). Beyond the annotation, the description offers minimal transparency.

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, brief sentence: 'List all available IAM policies'. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words. Every part is essential.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters including pagination and filtering, the description is somewhat incomplete. It does not hint at the advanced filtering capabilities (page, size, type, searchWord) which are important for effective use. While the schema provides details, the description could be enriched. Overall, adequate but with gaps.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning (e.g., explaining when to use searchWord or type). With full schema coverage, a baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'IAM policies', and the scope 'all available'. This distinguishes it from other list tools, especially the sibling 'ncloud_gtm_list_policies' which lists GTM policies. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other policy-related tools.

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. It does not mention when not to use it, nor does it reference other list tools or filtering strategies. The agent is left without context for tool selection.

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