vcluster_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key behaviors: creation, optional values file, upgrade behavior, and kubeconfig default. It also states the return type. However, it does not clarify what happens when a vcluster with the same name already exists and upgrade is False, nor does it mention side effects like switching to the new vcluster context or required permissions. The description is moderately transparent but has gaps.

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 well-structured with a concise introductory paragraph, a clearly labeled Args block, and a Returns section. It front-loads the main purpose. While it is slightly verbose due to repeating the purpose and providing a full Args list, every sentence contributes useful information and no filler is present.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters and no annotations or output schema given to the agent. The description covers all parameters, explains the return type, and describes the upgrade behavior. It still lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., host cluster, kubectl), what happens on duplicate names without upgrade, or whether the created vcluster becomes the active context. For a create operation, the description is reasonably complete but could be richer.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so thoroughly by providing a dedicated Args section explaining each parameter: name (the name for the new vcluster), values (optional path to a values file), upgrade (flag to upgrade if it was created before), and kubeconfig_path (optional path, with a default behavior described). This adds significant meaning beyond the basic schema titles.

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 opens with 'Create a new vcluster', a specific verb+resource phrasing that immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like vcluster_describe, vcluster_delete, and vcluster_list. It further clarifies the scope by mentioning the cluster name and optional configuration, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use the tool by stating 'Create a new vcluster' and describing the upgrade parameter ('the cluster will be upgraded if it was created before'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives, when not to use it, or how it relates to sibling tools like vcluster_delete or vcluster_pause. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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