add_cluster_role_to_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It indicates a mutating RBAC action but does not mention idempotency, how existing bindings are affected, whether cluster-admin privileges are required, or what side effects occur.

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?

A single, direct sentence that front-loads the action and resource before the implementation detail. Every word earns its place, and it is an appropriate size for a simple RBAC grant operation.

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?

The output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required from the description. However, for a mutating RBAC tool with no annotations, the description is thin: it lacks cluster parameter semantics, permission expectations, and guidance about the similar sibling tool, leaving an agent to infer important context.

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 must compensate. It clarifies that 'role' is a ClusterRole and 'username' is a user, but it entirely omits the ambiguous 'cluster' parameter and gives no additional semantics beyond the property names.

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 states a specific verb ('Grant'), a clear resource ('a ClusterRole'), and a target ('a user'), and backs it with the exact underlying oc command. This distinguishes it from the sibling add_cluster_role_to_group by explicitly naming the recipient as a user.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_cluster_role_to_group, list_cluster_roles, or create_role_binding. It implies when it applies by its name, but never states prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions.

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