get_resource

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions output formats but fails to state that the operation is read-only, does not describe authentication or rate limits, and omits what happens if the resource is not found. This is insufficient for a safe agent invocation.

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-loading the core purpose and format options. Every word serves a purpose; there is no wasted text. It efficiently communicates essential information.

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 five parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the output schema (even though one exists), fails to explain parameter dependencies (e.g., namespace vs. cluster-scoped resources), and lacks any error handling notes. The agent would need to guess many details.

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 only adds meaning for the 'output' parameter (via the tip) and ignores the other four parameters (name, resource_type, cluster, namespace). This leaves the agent without guidance on required inputs beyond their 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'any resource', clearly stating the tool's purpose. It also specifies output formats (YAML, JSON, wide) and provides a tip for 'oc describe', making the function distinct from sibling tools that target specific resources.

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 offers a usage tip for format selection ('Use output="describe" for oc describe'), but does not specify when to use this general getter over dedicated sibling tools (e.g., get_pod, get_node). There's no mention of conditional usage or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer context from sibling names.

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