scale_deploymentconfig

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the primary action but omits important behavioral details such as whether scaling triggers a rollout, permission requirements, reversibility, or impact on ongoing deployments. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 one sentence, immediately states the action and target, and contains no redundant information. It is appropriately concise.

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 tool's complexity and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not mention prerequisites, side effects (like triggering rollouts), or how it relates to other deployment tools in the sibling list. The 17-word description leaves significant gaps for an agent to reason about.

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 adds no context about parameters. It does not explain what 'name' refers to, how 'replicas' is used, or the meaning of 'namespace' and 'cluster_alias'. The bare parameter names in the schema are all the agent has to work with.

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 a specific verb 'Scale' and clearly identifies the resource 'OpenShift DeploymentConfig' and the outcome 'to the specified number of replicas.' It distinguishes from siblings like scale_deployment and scale_statefulset by naming the exact resource type.

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 the tool is for scaling DeploymentConfig resources, which differentiates it from scale_deployment, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusion scenarios. The resource type in the description offers some contextual guidance.

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