create_cluster_kubeconfig

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

No annotations provided, so the description fully covers behavioral traits: warns that the result is a live credential containing a bearer token, instructs not to echo it, explains TTL defaults and that 'never' mints a 10-year token, and describes the return format as raw kubeconfig YAML.

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 concise, front-loaded with purpose, and efficiently covers all necessary details without redundant sentences. Every sentence adds value.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides solid coverage: security, prerequisites, return format, revocation. Could mention idempotency or error states, but it's fairly complete for the complexity.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds context: explains enum options for role and ttl, clarifies that 'never' means 10-year token, and ties service_id to list_services. This adds meaningful value beyond the 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 clearly states the verb 'create', the resource 'kubeconfig credential for managed Kubernetes cluster', and the purpose 'standing automation (CI, GitOps)'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like revoke_cluster_kubeconfig and download_cluster_kubeconfig.

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?

Provides explicit scope requirement (services:write), role options, TTL details, and references list_services for service_id. Also suggests revocation with revoke_cluster_kubeconfig. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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