k8s_rollout_status

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It correctly implies a read-only operation by stating 'Get the rollout status', but does not explicitly confirm no side effects or mention any prerequisites, rate limits, or destructive potential. The description is adequate but could be more explicit.

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, consisting of two sentences that front-load the action and target resources. Every sentence provides value without unnecessary words.

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 that the tool has 4 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides the basic purpose and output content but leaves gaps in parameter documentation and usage context. It is minimally complete but could benefit from additional details on expected output format and parameter constraints.

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 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any parameters. While parameter names like 'name', 'context', 'namespace', and 'resource_type' are self-explanatory, the 'resource_type' parameter's allowed values (deployment, daemonset, statefulset) are mentioned in the description but not directly linked to the parameter. More detailed parameter guidance would be beneficial.

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 specifies the verb 'Get the rollout status' and the target resources 'deployment, daemonset, or statefulset'. It also states what information is shown (replica counts, conditions, completion status). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'k8s_describe' or 'k8s_rollout_history', which could also show status details.

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 (e.g., when to use 'k8s_rollout_status' instead of 'k8s_describe' or other rollout tools). The description lacks explicit recommendations or exclusions.

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