Обновление версии Kubernetes-кластера

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the description does not need to restate that. It adds the useful behavioral detail that omitting the version selects the next available one. It does not mention potential risks like downtime, but given the annotations, the provided extra context is sufficient for a baseline.

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 concise at two short sentences. It leads with the purpose and immediately follows with a relevant behavioral nuance. No words are wasted, and the structure is clear and easy to parse.

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 simple nature of the tool (two parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of annotations covering safety characteristics, the description is complete enough for an agent to understand what it does and how to use it. It explains the core action and the optional version behavior. No output schema is present, but the description does not need to explain return values since the focus is on the operation itself.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds meaningful semantics for k8s_version by explaining that it is optional and that omission triggers selection of the next available version. This goes beyond the schema's basic description, though it offers no additional insight for cluster_id.

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 that the tool updates the Kubernetes version in a cluster, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like edit_k8s_cluster by focusing explicitly on the version aspect, and it further clarifies an optional behavior (auto-selecting the next available version).

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 clear context: it is used to update the Kubernetes version, and it explains that the version can be omitted to trigger an automatic next-available selection. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like edit_k8s_cluster, though the name and sibling list imply the distinction.

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