gcloud_container_clusters_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a read-only, non-destructive operation, nor does it mention rate limits, pagination behavior (e.g., whether it returns all clusters or has a page limit), or the format of the output.

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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool, but could omit 'in the current project' if the schema or context already makes that clear.

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 two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but lacks details on output (e.g., whether it returns cluster names, statuses, etc.) and behavioral specifics. For a simple list operation, this is acceptable but not comprehensive.

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%, so both parameters (zone, region) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no further parameter guidance (e.g., whether they are mutually exclusive, or what happens if both are provided). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists GKE clusters, specifying the resource (GKE clusters) and the scope (current project). It could be improved by noting whether it lists across all regions/zones by default, but it's still clear and distinct from siblings like gcloud_container_clusters_describe.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like gcloud_container_clusters_describe (for a single cluster) or gcloud_container_node_pools_list (for node pools within a cluster). The description also doesn't mention prerequisites like being authenticated to a project.

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