ncloud_ncs_list_parts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it performs a GET, reflects the current state of an in-progress upload, and supports pagination. It does not describe response shape or whether the list could be truncated, but the read-only safety profile is already covered by 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 compact clauses: one states the core purpose and endpoint, the other states pagination behavior. There is no filler or duplication of schema content.

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 read-only list operation with fully described parameters and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is adequate. It could mention what the response contains or that results may be truncated, but the schema and pagination guidance already equip an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 all five parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the pagination relationship between maxParts and partNumberMarker, but adds little 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?

The description names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('parts uploaded so far for a multipart upload'), and includes the HTTP endpoint shape. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_ncs_list_multipart_uploads or ncloud_ncs_list_objects.

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 gives clear context: this tool is for inspecting parts of an existing multipart upload, and it explicitly instructs how to paginate using maxParts and partNumberMarker. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but the multipart-upload framing is sufficient guidance.

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