list_cluster_contexts

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('Show'), but with no annotations, it should explicitly state that no modifications are made. It does not disclose error scenarios (e.g., no clusters configured). A simple 'Read-only' label would improve 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?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it misses important details about parameters and output. It is not overly long, but it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 the tool has a single optional parameter and an output schema, the description should explain both. It fails to describe the parameter and provides no hint about what the output contains (e.g., lists of cluster names, context names, etc.).

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 input schema has one optional parameter 'cluster' with a default empty string, but the description does not explain its purpose (likely to filter by cluster name). Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description should provide semantics; it does not.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: showing configured MCP clusters and active oc kubeconfig contexts. It uses a specific verb ('Show') and resource, and is distinct from siblings like list_managed_clusters and get_cluster_info by focusing on both clusters and local contexts.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., list_managed_clusters, get_cluster_info). It also doesn't mention prerequisites like being logged into oc or having kubeconfig files. The user must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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