list_deploymentconfigs

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' implies a safe read operation, and 'all' indicates no filtering. However, it does not disclose behavior around cluster selection (cluster_alias), error handling, or permissions, leaving some gaps for a tool with no annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action and resource. It is front-loaded and contains no wasted words.

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?

For a simple list operation with an output schema, the description is mostly adequate but incomplete. It lacks any mention of cluster_alias, usage alternatives, or behavioral nuances, which prevents it from being fully self-contained given the lack of annotations.

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. It explains the namespace parameter via 'in a namespace' but completely omits the cluster_alias parameter, which is a significant gap. The default values in the schema are not mentioned either.

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 action ('List all') and the resource ('OpenShift DeploymentConfigs') with a namespace scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_deploymentconfig and scale_deploymentconfig by indicating it returns all items, not a single one or an action.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'in a namespace' implies it is for enumeration, but it does not mention that get_deploymentconfig should be used for individual resources or any other exclusions.

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