export_cluster_yaml

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is an export operation (likely read-only), provides default behavior (account_id from env var, cloud default 'aws'), and gives an example cluster_id format. However, it does not mention error handling, rate limits, or authentication requirements beyond the env var reference.

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 sentence plus a structured Args list. It front-loads the purpose and uses clear, minimal language. No extraneous information is present, and 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 3 parameters, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, parameter details, and use case. It lacks error handling or example output, but the output schema likely documents return values, so it is reasonably complete for this simple export tool.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates fully. It explains each parameter: cluster_id (with example), account_id (optional, default from env var), and cloud (lists valid values: aws or azure). This adds essential meaning beyond the raw schema titles and types.

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 'Export an Ocean cluster configuration as YAML', specifying the verb (export), resource (Ocean cluster configuration), and output format (YAML). It also provides use cases (GitOps comparison or backup), distinguishing it from siblings like get_cluster (JSON) and export_vng_yaml (different resource).

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 mentions it is 'useful for GitOps comparison or backup', implying usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_cluster or export_vng_yaml, nor does it provide exclusion criteria. The guidance is implied but not explicit.

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