ncloud_wms_get_results

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: results are scoped to a time window and broken down per monitoring location, and it names the aggregate metrics returned. It does not mention pagination, result caps, or how the aggregation type affects output.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource and returned metrics come first. It is efficient, though the metric enumeration makes it slightly dense without aiding tool selection.

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 no output schema, the description does describe the shape of the result (aggregated metrics per location), which is the most important gap to fill. It still omits how the 'type' aggregation granularity changes the response and any volume/pagination expectations for a 6-parameter read.

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% with all 6 parameters documented, including enum values, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes the time-window (from/to) and per-location (locationTypeCodes) dimensions without adding syntax or meaning the schema lacks.

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 and resource ('Get the results of a WMS scenario') and enumerates the returned metrics (average load time, success/error counts, availability), which is concrete. It does not name or distinguish itself from the close sibling ncloud_wms_get_result_detail, so the differentiation is left to inference.

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 'over a time window' phrase implies the query is temporal, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the obvious alternative ncloud_wms_get_result_detail or ncloud_wms_list_monitors. The agent must infer routing on its own.

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