k8s_cluster_info

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It covers what it checks and the return schema (overall health with breakdowns), but lacks explicit statements about being read-only, permission requirements, or potential side effects. It is partly transparent but incomplete.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second adds detail and output format. No redundant information, front-loaded with key verb and resource. Excellent structure for quick comprehension.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return structure. The single parameter is not described, which is a gap. Overall, it's fairly complete for a simple read tool, missing only parameter explanation. Context signals show low schema coverage, so description should compensate.

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 input schema has one parameter 'context' with no description, and the tool description does not explain it. With 0% schema coverage, the description should clarify what 'context' means (e.g., kubeconfig context name). It fails to add meaning beyond the schema.

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 comprehensive health summary of the entire Kubernetes cluster, listing specific checks (nodes, pods, deployments, etc.) and output format (health status with breakdowns). It distinguishes itself from more specific siblings like k8s_get_nodes or k8s_get_resources.

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 this is for overall cluster health assessment, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. Given many sibling tools for specific resources, guidance on scope would be helpful.

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