ncloud_pca_list_cas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying return fields (status, type, alias, certificate details), but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior or rate limits. This is above baseline but not rich.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the key action. No redundant words or phrases. Every sentence provides necessary information without exceeding length.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. It could mention pagination details or default behavior, but the current level is sufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter pageNo, which has a clear description in the schema. The description does not add any further meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score 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 explicitly states the action ('List all Private CA instances') and resource, which clearly differentiates from sibling tools like ncloud_pca_get_ca (single CA) and ncloud_pca_create_ca (creation). The verb 'list' is precise and unambiguous.

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 implies usage for listing all CAs but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned, though the tool name and sibling context hint at its role. A score of 3 reflects adequate but not explicit guidance.

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