ncloud_secret_update_secret_value

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, lowering the bar. The description adds that each stage value is a JSON object string and that at least one stage must be supplied, which is useful. It does not state whether values are overwritten in place or how prior stages behave, so it adds moderate but not rich context.

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 short sentences with no waste, and the core behavior is front-loaded before the constraint. Efficient and readable, though slightly terse relative to the tool's complexity.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, annotations present, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials for a simple mutation tool. Its main gap is failing to differentiate from the sibling stage-value tool and omitting any note on the keyIsolation host choice, leaving routing ambiguous.

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 schema already documents all five parameters including the keyIsolation enum. The description only restates the stage parameters at a high level and adds nothing about keyIsolation or the required secretId, so baseline 3 applies.

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 verb (Replace) and resource (secret values of the previous/active/pending stages), so an agent knows exactly what mutation is performed. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling ncloud_secret_update_secret_stage_value, which is a genuine routing risk.

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?

'At least one stage is required' communicates a precondition, and passing stages implies the use case. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of the sibling stage-value tool or when to prefer this one over get_secret_stage_value / update_secret_stage_value.

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