kubectl_patch

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

The destructiveHint annotation indicates mutation, but the description adds no further behavioral details such as error conditions, conflict handling, or the effect of different patch types. Given the annotation already signals destructiveness, the description's value is minimal.

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 of 15 words, front-loading the verb and key information. No superfluous content.

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 has 8 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and three distinct patch types, the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, patch type selection, or how it differs from siblings like kubectl_apply. Important context is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema itself documents all parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining the semantic difference between patchData and patchFile or patchType variants. Meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 states 'Update field(s) of a resource' which clearly indicates the action and resource. It also specifies three patch types, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like kubectl_apply which can also update resources.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like kubectl_apply or kubectl_create. No context about partial vs full updates or prerequisites is provided.

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