provision_cluster

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only reveals that the operation is async, which is useful, but it does not mention potential side effects, resource cleanup, required prior states, or how success is communicated.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource, and includes the key note about async behavior. There is no wasted wording, though the extreme brevity limits the informational value.

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 complex provisioning operation with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not explain how to monitor the async operation, what 'provisioning' entails, dependencies on other tools, or how this interacts with create_cluster or provision_node.

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 schema covers all parameters with basic descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific context, such as the relationship between master_node_id and worker_node_ids, the role of k3s_config, or how ssh_config is used for authentication.

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 provisions a K3s cluster on Raspberry Pi nodes, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_cluster (likely a metadata operation) and provision_node (single node), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_cluster or provision_node. It mentions async operation but omits prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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