gcp_gke_clusters

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

The description includes '[SAFE]' tag, indicating read-only non-destructive behavior, but lacks details on pagination, region scoping, or authorization requirements. Without annotations, the description partially fulfills transparency.

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 extremely concise: two words plus a safety tag. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation with no parameters.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It fails to mention important context like project scope, region, or response format, which could help with tool selection among many siblings.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter info, earning the baseline score of 4 for zero parameters.

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 clearly states 'List GKE clusters', specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like gcp_compute_instances and azure_aks_clusters by targeting GKE specifically.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria.

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