ncloud_nks_list_available_addons

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

Annotations carry readOnlyHint=true, which the description aligns with. Beyond the annotation, it adds meaningful behavioral context: the 1.36+ availability constraint, that results vary by Kubernetes version and region, and concrete catalog contents (ExternalDNS, Istio since 2026-09-17). No contradiction with annotations; the description adds value beyond what annotations provide.

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 information-dense sentences with the purpose front-loaded, but the text is a bit cluttered: 'Requires k8sVersion' repeats the schema, and the Istio date ('since 2026-09-17') is a niche detail that could be trimmed. Every fragment mostly earns its place, but the structure could be cleaner.

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 3-param tool with no output schema, the description conveys purpose, required parameter, availability constraint, content examples, and variation factors. The main gap is the absence of return-value description (since there is no output schema), but for a list catalog the return shape is fairly evident. Reasonably complete overall.

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 coverage is 100% and the k8sVersion description is already detailed (including guidance to strip the -nks.N suffix). The description adds minor interpretive value by noting the catalog varies by version and region, and it redundantly restates 'Requires k8sVersion' which the schema's required array already conveys. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'List add-ons installable on an NKS cluster for a given Kubernetes version'. The word 'installable' plus 'Add-on Manager catalog' implicitly distinguishes this from siblings like ncloud_nks_list_cluster_addons (installed add-ons), but it does not explicitly name any sibling. Clear and specific, though differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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?

Provides some when-to-use context: 'Add-on Manager is only available on Kubernetes 1.36+ clusters' tells an agent when this catalog exists, and 'Requires k8sVersion' flags the dependency. However, it offers no explicit alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'for installed add-ons on a cluster use ncloud_nks_list_cluster_addons'). Usage context is implied but not fully developed.

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