kubectl_describe

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description 'Describe Kubernetes resources' is consistent but adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., what happens if resource not found, or the verbosity of output). With annotations covering the safety profile, the description meets the baseline but does not go beyond.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. Every word is functional, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 complexity of Kubernetes resources and the absence of an output schema, the description is minimal but sufficient to convey the core action. However, it lacks details about behavior (e.g., support for subresources, standard output format) that would aid an agent in understanding the tool's full capabilities. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the parameter names ('resource type, name, and optionally namespace'). Since the schema already documents the parameters, the description meets the baseline without adding value.

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 (Describe) and the resource (Kubernetes resources), and specifies the key parameters (resource type, name, namespace). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like kubectl_get (which lists) and explain_resource (which explains fields).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kubectl_get, kubectl_logs, or explain_resource. There is no mention of typical scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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