pod_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It indicates read-only behavior with '[READ]' and lists output fields, but does not disclose error handling, permissions, or formatting details (e.g., results limit, ordering).

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 highly concise, with a clear front-loaded statement of purpose, a usage note, and a parameter list in exactly four sentences. No unnecessary words.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and usage context well. However, it lacks details on return format, error states, or prerequisites like Kubeconfig setup, which would improve completeness for a Kubernetes tool.

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%, but the description adds clear semantics for all three parameters: namespace (scope or all), label_selector (example given), and target (defaults). This compensates well, though more examples could be added.

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 tool lists pods with specific fields (name, namespace, phase, etc.) and distinguishes itself from pod_get, which provides full detail. The verb 'list' and the resource 'pods' are explicit.

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 provides guidance on when to use the tool vs pod_get ('Use pod_get for full detail') and explains how to scope by namespace. However, it does not discuss when not to use it relative to other listing siblings like pod_describe.

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