remove_cluster

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the default-cluster reassignment side effect, which is valuable, but it does not mention whether the removal is reversible, whether it affects the actual cluster resources, or any permission requirements.

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?

Two short sentences front-load the core action and add a relevant side effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter removal tool, the description covers the essential action and an important edge case (default fallback). It lacks explicit irreversibility or permission notes, but the low complexity and schema-provided alias make it sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, and the description never mentions the 'alias' parameter. The schema only provides the parameter name and title, leaving the description to add no meaning beyond the structured data; the agent must infer that 'alias' identifies the cluster to remove.

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 uses the specific verb 'remove' with the resource 'registered cluster', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like register_cluster and list_clusters. It also adds a key behavioral detail about the default cluster, further clarifying the tool's scope.

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 states the core action ('Remove a registered cluster') and gives context about the default-cluster fallback, making the usage situation clear. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but none are needed given the tool's specific role among cluster management siblings.

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