Cluster info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals that the tool reads from system.clusters and reports topology, which implies a read-only metadata operation, but it does not disclose output format, scope, or any limitations.

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 tight sentence that names the resource, source, and key output aspects with no filler. It is instantly scannable and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 parameterless metadata tool, the description covers the essential purpose and source. It could add a little more detail about the expected return shape or whether it requires a specific cluster context, but the simplicity keeps the risk of misuse low.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema requires no explanation. The description adds meaningful context about what the cluster topology covers, which is sufficient for an argument-less tool.

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 identifies the resource (cluster topology) and source (system.clusters), with specifics like shards, replicas, and hosts. It does not use an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list', but the intent is unambiguous and distinct from the sibling metadata tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of siblings such as server_metrics or query. The description does not state exclusions or preferred contexts, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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