ncloud_ncs_upload_part_copy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that this is a server-side copy into a multipart part, mentions the HTTP verb and header, and notes it avoids downloading. However, it does not disclose response behavior, permission needs, or side effects such as replacing an existing part.

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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and API mechanism, and the second gives a concrete use case. The most important information is front-loaded.

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?

The description explains the purpose and the 5 GB motivation, and the schema fully documents all seven parameters. It does not mention the broader multipart workflow (e.g., that complete_multipart_upload is needed afterward) or return values, but no output schema exists and the core call semantics are clear.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-level context beyond mentioning 'byte range' and 'existing object', but it does not need to compensate because each parameter is already well documented in the schema.

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 action ('Copy a byte range of an existing object into a part of a multipart upload') with the underlying HTTP API. It also names the 5 GB CopyObject limit, which distinguishes it from ncloud_ncs_copy_object and ncloud_ncs_upload_part without requiring the agent to inspect siblings.

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?

Provides clear context: use it to assemble or re-class objects larger than the 5 GB CopyObject limit without downloading. It does not explicitly list exclusions or name sibling alternatives, but the intended use case is unambiguous.

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