batch_list_resources

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explains parameter precedence (kubeconfig_path vs cluster_name) and resource_types formats, but it fails to disclose return value structure, pagination, error handling, permission requirements, or whether the operation is read-only. The Returns line '批量查看结果' is tautological and adds no behavioral insight.

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 well-structured with a one-sentence summary followed by Args/Returns sections. The resource_types explanation is detailed but necessary given the parameter's complexity. However, the Returns line is vague and could be replaced with concrete output details, slightly reducing value per sentence.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: the return value is unspecified beyond 'batch view results', and there is no mention of pagination, errors, or permissions. While parameter semantics are solid, the overall behavioral contract is under-specified, making the description sufficient only as a minimal functional overview.

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 is the only source of parameter semantics. It thoroughly explains resource_types with three supported formats and CRD support, and clarifies the relationship and precedence between kubeconfig_path and cluster_name. namespace is only labeled, but its meaning is obvious. This significantly compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 '批量查看资源' clearly indicates a batch listing operation, and the tool name 'batch_list_resources' reinforces this. It is distinguishable from sibling batch_create/update/delete tools by the verb 'list/view', but it does not explicitly differentiate from batch_describe_resources or other read-only tools.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or reference sibling tools like batch_describe_resources for detailed descriptions. The only implied usage is the bare phrase 'batch view resources', which is insufficient for selecting among the many batch_* and read-oriented tools in the cluster.

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