k8s_top_nodes

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states what the tool displays and a prerequisite, but fails to disclose safety (e.g., read-only nature), potential errors if metrics-server is missing, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to gauge behavioral impact.

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 sentences with no extraneous words. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds a crucial prerequisite and a detail about the display format. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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 and one undocumented parameter, the description should provide more detail on output format and parameter usage. It hints at output ('Shows usage alongside capacity') but lacks precision. The prerequisite is helpful, but completeness is moderate.

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 only parameter 'context' is not described in the schema (0% coverage) nor in the description. The description gives no guidance on its purpose or format, leaving the agent to infer meaning from the tool name alone, which is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 it displays CPU and memory usage of all nodes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like k8s_top_pods which focuses on pod metrics. The verb+resource is specific and 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 mentions a prerequisite (metrics-server installation), providing context for successful use. While it doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, the purpose is distinct enough among siblings to avoid confusion.

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