get_etcd_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It only states 'Get ETCD cluster status' without disclosing if the operation is read-only, what the default behavior is when cluster is omitted, potential errors, or required permissions.

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 that is concise and front-loaded with the key information. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. Still, it earns a high score for being compact and direct.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description lacks essential context such as parameter meaning, usage conditions, and behavioral traits. For a single-parameter tool with no annotations, this minimal description is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 description provides no explanation for the 'cluster' parameter, despite 0% schema description coverage. It merely mentions the resource path, but does not clarify how the parameter relates to the cluster name or its default value, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use it.

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 the action (Get ETCD cluster status) and the specific resource (operator.openshift.io/v1 etcds/cluster). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_cluster_info or get_operator_status by targeting ETCD specifically.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_cluster_info or get_operator_status, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context.

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