ncloud_wms_get_result_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the detail content retrieved (load time, steps, error logs), but says nothing about permissions, pagination, or identity scoping (scenario/result/type).

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?

A single tight, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The parenthetical is a small redundancy but earns its place by previewing the return content in the absence of an output schema.

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?

Adequate for a simple read tool with fully documented parameters, and it offers a high-level view of returned fields since no output schema exists. It stops short of explaining how scenarioId/resultId/type combine or what the detail record structure looks like.

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% and includes the enum for type and a cross-reference for resultId, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 (Get) and resource (WMS monitoring result) scoped to 'one ... in detail', and names the content it returns (load time, transactions/steps, error logs). It contrasts contextually with the sibling list tool ncloud_wms_get_results, though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the singular 'one result' plus the resultId parameter (documented as coming from ncloud_wms_get_results) suggests use after listing. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative in the description itself.

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