kubectl_rollout

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint:true, which partially indicates potential impact. However, the description adds no behavioral details beyond generic 'manage rollout' – it doesn't explain that subcommands like undo or restart are destructive while status/ history are safe, nor does it mention permissions or cluster state changes.

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?

Single sentence front-loads the core purpose. No wasted words, though it could include brief sibling differentiation or a link to more details without becoming verbose.

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?

With 9 parameters, no output schema, and no description of subcommand behaviors or output format, the tool definition is incomplete. The description does not explain what each subcommand returns (e.g., status output, history list), nor does it list prerequisites like kubectl configuration.

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 baseline 3. The description adds no extra meaning to parameters; it does not elaborate on subcommand effects, revision handling, or timeout usage beyond what the schema already specifies.

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?

Description states 'Manage the rollout of a resource' with examples of resource types, clearly indicating the tool's scope. However, 'manage' is somewhat generic and doesn't specify the subcommands (history, pause, etc.) that are listed in the schema. Sibling tools like kubectl_apply and kubectl_scale differ in purpose, so it's distinguishable.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative kubectl tools or how to choose among subcommands. The description implies usage for rollout operations but lacks context for when-not-to-use or prerequisites like resource existence.

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