get_helm_release_costs

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

With no annotations, the description adds behavioral details: it reads release state from cluster secrets and detects orphaned releases. It does not mention potential issues like missing secrets or authentication, but overall is transparent enough.

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 very concise: three sentences covering purpose, extra behavior, technical note, plus five example queries. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 description covers core functionality and use cases but lacks details on return format or pagination. The mysterious 'context' parameter is unexplained, which hurts completeness for a tool with no output schema.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides no explanation for the two parameters (context, namespace). The agent cannot understand what these parameters control beyond their names.

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 provides a cost breakdown by Helm release, distinguishing it from raw deployment names. It also mentions orphaned release detection, which differentiates it from sibling tools like get_kubernetes_costs.

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 gives clear use cases through examples and notes it works without the Helm CLI, implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide direct alternatives.

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