list_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read). Description adds behavioral context: returns compact rows with summaryContext by default (managedBy, health, issueCount) and allows 'none' for bare rows. Does not mention pagination or limits, but given the safety profile, this is acceptable.

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?

Three sentences, no filler. First sentence states action, second describes output, third provides alternative tool guidance. Efficient and well-structured.

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 list tool with 4 parameters (1 required), annotations, and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the tool's role in the triage workflow and the nature of the output. Could mention pagination but not critical.

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% with each parameter described. The tool description reinforces the 'kind' parameter's role (prefer before get_resource) and the 'context' parameter's effect (summaryContext vs bare rows). This adds some clarity but does not go beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('sweep') and resource ('Kubernetes resource kind'), and contrasts with siblings: 'get_resource' for deep dive, 'search' for unknown kind/name, 'get_dashboard/issues' for health triage. This makes the tool's purpose distinct and clear.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (known resource kind) and when not (unknown kind/name -> search; broad health -> get_dashboard or issues). Also suggests using before get_resource for comparing suspects. Provides clear decision criteria.

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