k8s_get_resource_yaml

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool gets resources as YAML, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires specific permissions, how it handles missing resources, rate limits, or output format details beyond YAML. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, clearly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 complexity of Kubernetes operations and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or how it interacts with sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand when and how to use this tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (resource_type, name, namespace) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema, such as examples or constraints, but the high schema coverage justifies the baseline score of 3.

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 'Get any resource as YAML' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource type ('any resource'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like k8s_get_pod or k8s_get_deployment that fetch specific resource types. It lacks specificity about what 'any resource' means in the Kubernetes context.

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 versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like k8s_get_pod, k8s_get_deployment, etc., that fetch specific resources, the description doesn't explain why one would choose this generic tool over those specialized ones, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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