ncloud_serverless_list_imported_backups

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful context beyond that by listing the returned fields (name, zoneCode, size, status, engineVersion), the status values, and sortable fields, giving the agent a better sense of what to expect from the response. It does not mention any side effects, but none are applicable for a read-only list operation.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently appends the response fields, statuses, and sort fields in a parenthetical style. There is no redundant or filler content; every piece of information 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 straightforward list tool with no output schema, the description covers the resource definition, returned fields, status enums, sort fields, and account-level scope. Pagination details are handled by the parameter schemas. It could mention that the list might be large or that no filtering is available, but given the tool's simplicity and the rich schema, it is nearly complete.

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 each parameter already has a description. The description adds value by explicitly listing the allowed sort fields (name, importedDateTime, size), which the schema does not specify beyond the pattern. This supplements the schema and helps the agent construct valid sort parameters.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and the specific resource ('imported backups'), distinguishing it from regular backups by defining them as backup files brought in from Object Storage. It also specifies the account-level scope and the API endpoint, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 clear context by defining what imported backups are and noting they are account-level, which helps an agent infer when to use this tool versus related list tools (e.g., regular backups). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it stops short of full guidance.

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