apply_manifest

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions direct application via 'oc apply -f -' and includes a warning, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., creates/updates resources, potential overwrites) or prerequisites (e.g., authentication, cluster context). Minimal transparency.

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?

Two sentences; the warning is front-loaded. No fluff, but the description is too brief for the tool's complexity. Conciseness is good, but completeness suffers.

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?

Output schema exists but description does not mention return values. Given many sibling tools and the mutating nature, more context is needed (e.g., permissions, effects on existing resources, summary of output). Incomplete for safe usage.

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%, but the description only implicitly explains the 'yaml_content' parameter by mentioning YAML/JSON. The 'cluster' and 'namespace' parameters are not described at all. The description adds little meaning beyond the schema field 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?

Clearly states it applies a YAML or JSON manifest via 'oc apply -f -'. The purpose is clear, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like run_oc_command, which might also apply manifests. A higher score would require explicit distinction.

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?

Includes a warning to review manifests before applying, but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., run_oc_command). Missing scenarios where this tool is appropriate or inappropriate.

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