k8s_get_kubernetes_versions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only operation ('Get list') and discloses the return type ('List of available Kubernetes versions'). It does not mention side effects, but for a simple lookup, this is sufficient and not misleading.

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 two lines, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the 'for new clusters' qualifier is placed after the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place; there is zero fluff.

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?

For a no-parameter, list-returning tool, the description is complete. An output schema exists (per context signals), so the description need not explain return format. The scope qualifier 'for new clusters' covers the only possible ambiguity. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so per rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing to explain beyond what the schema (empty properties) already shows, and the description adds no need for parameter clarification.

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 states a specific action ('Get list') and resource ('available Kubernetes versions'), with an explicit scope qualifier 'for new clusters' that distinguishes it from sibling tools like k8s_get_kubernetes_available_upgrades. It is clear 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 phrase 'for new clusters' implies the intended context (when provisioning a new cluster) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No guidance is given about when not to use it, such as when checking for upgrades on existing clusters. However, the scope qualifier provides some directional hint.

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