get_hosted_cluster

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is clear. The description adds context about what data is returned (version, conditions, NodePools), but does not disclose other behaviors like permission requirements or response limitations. This adds some value beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 very concise, front-loaded with the key resource and output fields, and includes a clean Args section. Every sentence contributes useful information without unnecessary filler.

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?

With an output schema available, return structure is already covered. The two parameters are well documented. The only notable gap is the lack of usage context, but for a simple get-by-key tool this is acceptable and the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

Both parameters are explained: name as the HostedCluster name, and namespace as the hosting namespace. This adds meaning beyond the schema's minimal type-only definitions. Given schema description coverage is 0%, this is essential and effectively compensates for the gap.

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 that the tool provides detailed HostedCluster information including version, conditions, and NodePools. Although it lacks an explicit verb, the tool name 'get_hosted_cluster' clarifies the action. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like list_hosted_clusters and get_cluster.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to other getter tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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