get_build_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should compensate. It mentions using 'oc describe bc', implying a read operation, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, or behavior on missing resources. The description lacks behavioral details expected for a command-line tool.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it borders on being too vague; a bit more detail could improve clarity without sacrificing conciseness.

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 description is minimal for a tool that describes a complex resource. While an output schema is indicated (not shown), the description does not mention what 'in detail' means (e.g., full YAML/JSON). It is adequate but could be more complete.

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%, meaning the schema has no parameter descriptions. The tool description does not explain the parameters (name, cluster, namespace) beyond their names, missing an opportunity to clarify their roles, especially for 'cluster' and 'namespace' which have defaults but no explanation.

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 describes a BuildConfig in detail using 'oc describe bc'. The verb 'describe' and resource 'BuildConfig' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like 'get_build' or 'get_build_logs' which serve different purposes.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The usage is implied by the name and description, but there is no mention of alternatives or prerequisites, which would be helpful given the large set of sibling tools.

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