get_deploymentconfig

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get detailed information' and does not mention return format, error behavior, permission requirements, or that it is a read-only operation. While 'Get' implies non-mutating, the description lacks any extra behavioral context.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple getter, stating exactly what the tool does without fluff.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not describe what 'detailed information' includes (e.g., spec, status), nor does it provide context on cluster selection or return format. The tool is simple, but the description leaves significant ambiguity for the agent.

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 schema provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), and the description does not compensate. It does not explain the meaning or usage of name, namespace, or cluster_alias, leaving the agent to infer solely from field names and defaults, which is insufficient.

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 gets detailed information about an OpenShift DeploymentConfig. It specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'OpenShift DeploymentConfig', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_deployment (for Kubernetes Deployments) and list_deploymentconfigs.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_deploymentconfigs or scale_deploymentconfig. The description only states what the tool does, without any context on prerequisites, selection criteria, or when not to use it.

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