get_nodes

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

The description lacks behavioral traits beyond the implied read operation. No annotations are present, so the description should disclose permissions, side effects, or limitations, but it does not.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no superfluous words. It front-loads the core purpose.

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 output schema and a simple purpose, the description is adequate but does not elaborate on the 'wide' format output, which could help an agent understand the return structure.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary information.

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 action ('列出' = list), the resource ('集群中的所有节点' = all nodes in the cluster), and the output format ('wide 格式' = wide format). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_pods and cluster_info.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_namespaces or cluster_info. There are no exclusions or context about prerequisites.

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