ncloud_serverless_list_operations

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

Given that readOnlyHint=true is already present, the description does not need to restate safety. It adds real value-by-one: it clarifies that account-specific resource types return all items and rely on the client for filtering, and it enumerates the allowed sort fields. It does not mention rate limits or error handling, but these are less necessary for a read-only list tool.

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 three sentences, but does not waste words. It front-loads the purpose, then the account-wide pitfall, and finally provides sort guidance. The only minor issue is the parenthetical 'filter cluster operations client-side by results["0"].name' is a bit cryptic, but the overall structure is functional and neat.

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?

Given the schema already wraps up the parameter descriptions and page-size semantics, the description need not explain the return value. It supplies the missing behavioral flavor (resourceType routing, account-wide behavior) and covers the sort of useful sort fields. It is not a field-by-field tutorial, but for a read-only listing tool it is enough to 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?

The schema has 100% coverage description, making that not a burden. The description contributes the key insight: 'sort fields: startDateTime, endDateTime, operationType', which the schema leaves unspecified beyond generic pattern. It also mentions the 16 resource types and which are additive filters, which adds practical meaning to the resourceType parameter.

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 a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('asynchronous operations'), and enforces the scope via 'routed by resourceType', which is not a vague or tiny. It also reveals the secret is a single tool that maps to 16 documented list*Operations endpoints. This is far above a generic 'list operations' statement.

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 is no explicit: mention of when to pick this over sibling tools such as ncloud_serverless_get_operation or ncloud_serverless_list_clusters. The only usage aid is the note about clusters/imported-backups being account-wide and requiring client-side filtering, but that is a behavioral caveat rather than a selector rule.

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