cluster_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. It describes the output (totals, list of unhealthy pods) but does not mention whether the tool is read-only, requires permissions, or has any side effects. This is minimal adequacy but lacks depth.

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 that immediately states the tool's purpose and usage hint. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text.

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 no parameters and an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the essential information: what the tool returns (health totals, unhealthy pods) and its entry-point role. It could mention that it provides a cluster-level summary, but it is sufficiently complete.

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, and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info, and it correctly provides no unnecessary detail.

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 tool provides 'node and pod health totals plus the list of unhealthy pods,' which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_pods and node_health by suggesting to 'start here,' indicating it's an entry point for health overview.

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 phrase 'Start here' explicitly guides the agent to use this tool first when investigating cluster health, providing clear context. However, it does not include explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool recommendations, which would have merited a 5.

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