oc_api_resources

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. 'List' signals a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly note that it makes no changes, nor does it disclose behavior like cluster context usage or output structure beyond 'details'.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the tool's action and scope.

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 read-only discovery tool, the description combined with a fully documented schema is largely sufficient. It lacks an explicit note about return format or output structure (no output schema exists), and no annotations add safety context, but the core purpose and parameters are covered.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the six parameters are fully documented in the schema with types, defaults, and examples. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and distinct resource ('all available API resources in the OpenShift cluster'), clearly differentiating from siblings like oc_get or oc_explain that target specific resources or explanations. It communicates both action and scope in a single sentence.

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 usage for discovering API resources but provides no explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer oc_explain or oc_get, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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