list_pods

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds value by noting that unhealthy pods sort first, but it omits other behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination. The existence of an output schema compensates slightly, but the description remains somewhat sparse.

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 very concise, using a single sentence to convey the purpose and a key behavioral detail (sorting). It is front-loaded and contains no fluff. However, it could be slightly expanded without sacrificing conciseness to improve completeness.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, output schema exists), the description is adequate but not thorough. It explains the core functionality and sorting, but it does not clarify what constitutes 'unhealthy' pods or how to interpret the output. The output schema covers returns, but the description could still provide more context.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'optionally one namespace' but fails to explain what the namespace parameter is for, its format, or default behavior. This adds minimal meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('pods'), clarifies optional namespace scoping, and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_deployments and list_events. The unique behavior that unhealthy pods sort first is also stated, making the tool's purpose highly clear.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like pod_logs, node_health, or delete_pod exist, but there is no mention of when to choose list_pods instead. The context is only implied by the tool's purpose.

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