cluster_operations_listList operations for a specified cluster to check status, phase, and recent activity. Filter by namespace or phase and paginate results with a limit and cursor.
List cluster operations
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| phase | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| cluster | Yes | ||
| namespace | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes nothing beyond that: no ordering, pagination semantics, retention window, or meaning of the phase filter.
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 text is a single four-word phrase with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than concise. Brevity here reflects a missing description, not an efficient one.
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?
For a five-parameter listing tool with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the definition should explain filtering, pagination via cursor, and return shape. None of this is present, so the definition is not sufficient to invoke the tool correctly.
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 0% for five parameters, and the description documents none of them. The meaning of cluster, phase, cursor, and limit (default 100, max 500) is left entirely unstated, and the description does not even hint that filtering or pagination exists.
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?
Tautological: description restates name/title.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the closely related operations_list sibling, and no guidance on filtering or prerequisites. An agent must guess which listing tool to call.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.