get_prometheus_rule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns detailed rule content including all alerting and recording rules, which gives some behavioral context. However, it does not mention read-only nature, error behavior (e.g., not found), or any cluster/namespace handling aspects, so transparency is incomplete.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or filler 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?

Given the 3-parameter schema and no annotations or output schema, the description is too sparse to fully guide invocation. It covers the return value ('all alerting and recording rules') but omits critical context about parameter semantics and selection criteria, making it incomplete for an agent to know how to correctly fetch a specific rule.

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 by explaining parameters. It does not mention 'name', 'namespace', or 'cluster_alias' at all. The agent is left without any guidance on how to specify which PrometheusRule to fetch or what role each parameter plays, making parameter usage entirely 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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('PrometheusRule'), and adds meaningful scope by specifying it includes 'all alerting and recording rules.' This distinguishes it from sibling list_prometheus_rules, which would only list rules without detailed content.

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 implies usage when detailed rule information is needed ('Get detailed'), but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus list_prometheus_rules or other siblings. No alternatives or exclusions are provided, leaving the agent to infer the distinction from sibling names.

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