Список всех нод кластера

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

The description indicates a read-only operation ('Возвращает список' / 'Returns a list'), but the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, creating a direct contradiction. No additional behavioral context (e.g., side effects, permissions, pagination) is provided, so the description fails to clarify the actual behavior.

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, direct sentence with no redundant information. It precisely conveys the function and return fields without filler, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple one-parameter list tool, the description adequately specifies the output fields and scope (all nodes). However, the annotation contradiction and lack of usage guidance reduce completeness slightly, though the core functionality is clear enough for an agent.

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 fully describes the only parameter (cluster_id, required, integer, with description 'ID кластера'). The tool description adds no additional parameter detail, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a list of all cluster nodes (master and worker) with specific attributes (ID, type, group, status, characteristics). This uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('nodes'), and the 'master and worker' distinction helps differentiate it from node-group-specific tools like list_k8s_node_group_nodes.

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 usage context ('all nodes in cluster') but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_k8s_node_group_nodes. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, so it's minimally adequate but not explicit.

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