ncloud_pipeline_list_sourcedeploy_scenarios

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint=true`, establishing that this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it lists available scenarios for a project stage, which is consistent. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or that filtering is available via `searchWord`. Given the annotation coverage, the description adds minimal additional value.

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, direct sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 list tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It explains the core purpose but does not inform about pagination, filtering, or the structure of returned data. The schema covers parameters, but the agent has no guidance on the response. Given the complexity (5 parameters), the description is somewhat incomplete.

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 input schema already documents all five parameters with descriptions. The tool description only mentions 'project stage', which implies the `projectId` and `stageId` parameters but adds no detail about `pageNo`, `pageSize`, or `searchWord`. The description adds little meaning beyond 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?

The description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'SourceDeploy scenarios' with clear context 'for a project stage'. It distinguishes from similar tool `ncloud_sourcedeploy_list_scenarios` which may list all scenarios without filtering by project and stage.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `ncloud_sourcedeploy_list_scenarios`. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases. The agent is left to infer from the name and parameters.

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