ibmcloud_ks_versions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states that it lists versions but does not mention return format, whether authentication is required, or any other behavioral aspects. For a simple read-only list, this is acceptable but minimal, and adds little beyond the tool name.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's 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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete enough to inform an agent. It fully states what the tool does. It could optionally mention the IBM Cloud Kubernetes Service context, but that is implied by the naming convention.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered (vacuously). Per rubric, 0 params baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details.

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 'List available Kubernetes versions' uses a specific verb (List) and resource (available Kubernetes versions), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like ibmcloud_ks_clusters (list clusters) and ibmcloud_ks_flavors (list flavors). The purpose is immediately obvious.

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 gives clear context: this tool lists Kubernetes versions. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple, parameterless list command, the context is sufficient. No misleading information.

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