list_k8s_versions

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds value by clarifying the scope of versions (creation vs upgrade), which is a useful behavioral nuance. It does not disclose other traits like response format, but for a simple list tool, this is sufficient beyond annotations.

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 two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides usage guidance and alternatives. It is front-loaded, concise, and every sentence earns its place. No fluff or 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description is fully complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns (list of versions), when to use it, and which alternatives exist. The context signals confirm no additional information is necessary.

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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rules. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, and it doesn't add irrelevant info. The empty schema is fully covered, so no further parameter explanation is required.

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 lists all available Kubernetes versions in IONOS CLOUD, using a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from related siblings by noting these versions are for creating new clusters/node pools, not for upgrades, which differentiates it from get_k8s_cluster/get_k8s_nodepool and get_k8s_default_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 explicitly states when to use this tool (for creation of new clusters/node pools) and when not to (for upgrades), and directly names alternatives via availableUpgradeVersions and get_k8s_cluster/get_k8s_nodepool. This gives clear, actionable guidance.

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