ncloud_livestation_switch_stream

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it delivers little beyond the base action. It does not say whether the switch is reversible, whether it interrupts the live broadcast, what happens to the previously active stream, or what permissions or preconditions are required for this mutation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action and resource first and the target state immediately after; nothing is redundant. The trailing parenthetical '(channel-stream-switch)' restates the operation name rather than adding information, a minor blemish.

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?

For a state-changing operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin: it omits preconditions, side effects on the currently active stream, reversibility, and what (if anything) is returned. An agent can identify the tool but not safely predict the consequences of invoking it.

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?

Only one parameter exists and the schema documents it at 100% coverage ('Channel ID whose stream to switch'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no syntax, format, or lookup guidance for channelId beyond what the schema already states.

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 specific verb (Switch) and resource (active input stream of a Live Station channel) and clarifies the target state (to its standby stream), so an agent understands this is a failover-style switch. It does not name or differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as ncloud_livestation_start_channel, _stop_channel or _resume_channel, so it lands just below the top band.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of prerequisites (e.g. a standby stream must already be configured) or of alternatives to start/stop the channel. The failover intent can be inferred from 'standby stream', but nothing routes the agent among sibling channel operations.

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