Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-mcp-server

ncloud-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_restore_nas_volume_with_snapshot

Destructive

Restore a NAS volume from a chosen snapshot, overwriting current data. Requires confirm=true to execute this destructive operation.

Instructions

⚠️ Destructive: Restore a NAS volume to a previous snapshot state. Current data will be overwritten with the snapshot data. Set confirm=true to execute.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "nasVolumeInstanceNo": "<nasVolumeInstanceNo>",
      "nasVolumeSnapshotNo": "<nasVolumeSnapshotNo>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_restore_nas_volume_with_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to actually execute the destructive operation
nasVolumeInstanceNoYesNAS volume instance number to restore
nasVolumeSnapshotNoYesNAS volume snapshot number to restore from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

While destructiveHint annotation already marks it destructive, the description adds critical context: 'Current data will be overwritten with the snapshot data' and the confirm=true safeguard. This goes beyond the annotation by specifying the exact data-loss behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence with a clear warning, the action, and the confirmation requirement. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-param destructive restore tool, the description plus schema fully cover the prerequisites, the destructive behavior, and the confirm safety mechanism. Output schema absence is acceptable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the description mostly restates the confirm parameter's purpose from the schema. It doesn't add new semantics for nasVolumeInstanceNo or nasVolumeSnapshotNo beyond their names.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action: 'Restore a NAS volume to a previous snapshot state' with a specific resource (NAS volume) and the effect (overwrite). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_nas_snapshot or delete_nas_snapshot.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides the key usage requirement 'Set confirm=true to execute' and the context of restoring a volume, but doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use. The destructive warning implicitly signals caution.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools