ingress_get

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

The description starts with '[READ]', indicating it is a read-only operation. No annotations are provided, so the description partially fulfills the need to disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, authentication, or rate limits, but the read hint is sufficient for a simple retrieval 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 extremely concise: one line for the purpose and three bullet-like lines for arguments. No unnecessary words or repetition, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple get tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and parameter usage adequately. It does not describe return format or error conditions, but given the low complexity, 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning to all three parameters: 'name' references 'ingress_list', 'namespace' explains default behavior, and 'target' is described as a k8s target from config. This is good coverage, though more precise formats or examples could improve it.

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 'return detail' and the resource 'single ingress', and specifies included information 'path→backend rules'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'ingress_list'.

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?

Some parameter guidance is provided (e.g., 'see ingress_list' for name, namespace default, target from config), but there is no explicit statement on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ingress_list or other get tools.

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