list_machine_autoscalers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists resources but does not describe permissions required, pagination behavior, or whether the listing is filtered by namespace or cluster scope.

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 of 14 words, front-loaded with the verb 'List' and resource, and efficiently conveys the core information without extraneous content.

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 output schema exists but is not referenced. The description mentions displayed fields, which is helpful. However, the lack of parameter clarity and usage guidance leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 single parameter 'cluster' has a default but no explanation of its purpose or effect (e.g., whether it filters results). Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no semantic value beyond the field name.

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 tool lists MachineAutoscalers and specifies the namespace (openshift-machine-api) and displayed fields (target MachineSet, min, max, age). It differentiates from sibling tools like list_machine_sets by focusing on autoscalers, but does not explicitly contrast with other autoscaler operations.

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 versus alternatives like list_machine_sets or create_machine_autoscaler. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual hints about typical use cases.

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