list_deployments_image_info

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

The verb 'Get' implies a non-mutating read operation, which is the primary behavioral trait. However, without any annotations, the description does not disclose potential permission requirements, cluster context behavior, or side effects. For a simple read tool this is acceptable but leaves some ambiguity about cluster_alias handling.

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 concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose and output. No unnecessary words or repetition of schema information.

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 tool is simple (two optional parameters) and an output schema exists, so the description need not detail return values. The core function and scope are covered well. However, the omission of cluster_alias semantics and any default behavior leaves a minor completeness gap.

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 for parameter meanings. It references 'a namespace' but does not explain the 'namespace' or 'cluster_alias' parameters. The cluster_alias parameter is entirely unexplained, and its role in selecting a cluster context remains ambiguous.

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 image repository, tag, and version label for all Deployments in a namespace. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_deployment_image_info (singular) and list_deployments (which lists deployments, not image info).

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 clearly indicates the use case: retrieving image metadata for all Deployments within a namespace. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name sibling tools, the plural scope and mention of 'all Deployments' provide clear context for when to use this tool.

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