Raw KAS API call

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It reveals that writes require an environment variable and deletes require a confirmation parameter, but does not mention side effects, authentication, or error behavior.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence provides essential information without unnecessary fluff.

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 no output schema, the description does not mention the return value or format. This is a gap, though the tool's generic nature may make return values obvious. It fails to specify pagination, error handling, or response structure.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving examples for the action parameter (e.g., 'get_cronjobs') and specifying the params object type and the special requirement for delete actions, which goes beyond 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 clearly states it calls any KAS action directly, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are for specific actions, making its generic purpose obvious.

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?

Description includes conditions for writes and deletes (KAS_ALLOW_WRITES=1, params.confirm=true) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings. It implies use for actions not covered by siblings, but does not state this directly.

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