list_manifest_works

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It adds that the listing is scoped to a specific namespace (cluster_name), implying a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state read-only nature, permission requirements, or side effects.

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?

A single sentence of 10 words, no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 an output schema and is a simple list operation, the description is partially complete. It covers the main purpose and scope but misses explaining the cluster parameter and usage context.

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 two parameters (cluster, cluster_name) with 0% schema description coverage. The description mentions only cluster_name in the context of namespace, providing some meaning. But it ignores the cluster parameter entirely, leaving its purpose unclear.

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 specific action (List), resource (ManifestWorks), and context (deployed to a ManagedCluster, with namespace=cluster_name). This distinguishes it from siblings like create_manifest_work and other list tools, but does not explicitly contrast with similar list tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The description only states what it does, failing to provide contextual usage cues.

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