cluster_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the '[READ]' prefix restates that, adding no new information. The description does add that the output is a 'friendly health summary' covering version and counts, but says nothing about failure modes or auth needs, which is acceptable but unremarkable given the low bar set by annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the summary purpose in the first line, and the Args block is short. Slightly padded by the redundant '[READ]' marker and the docstring-style 'Args:' formatting, but nothing is wasted.

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 one-optional-param read tool with no output schema, the description does enough: it says what the summary contains and how to target the cluster. No return-format detail is needed since output structure is minimal and self-describing.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does: 'target' is identified as a k8s target name from config with an explicit default behavior when omitted. This compensates well for the single undocumented schema param.

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 resource (cluster) and the exact contents returned: server version plus node/ns counts. The word 'summary' distinguishes it from listing siblings such as node_list and namespace_list, which enumerate rather than aggregate.

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 only guidance is on the target parameter ('omit to use the default'). There is no statement of when to reach for this overview instead of node_list or namespace_list, so the when-to-use is left implied by the word 'summary'.

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