kubernetes_create_cluster

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that the cluster is tagged 'created_by=scaleway-mcp' for identification and safe deletion, which adds value. However, it does not elaborate on other aspects like idempotency, permission requirements, or error behavior, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotations.

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 concise with three short sentences, each adding essential information: the primary action, the workflow note about pools, and the tagging detail. No unnecessary words, and key points are front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (8 parameters, output schema present), the description covers the core purpose and workflow. It could benefit from mentioning that region/project default to configured values, but the schema already notes defaults. The guidance on separate pool creation is valuable. Overall, it is mostly complete for a creation tool.

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 input schema already documents each parameter's meaning. The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the burden adequately.

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 it creates a Kubernetes cluster (Kapsule), distinguishing it from sibling tools like kubernetes_list_clusters and kubernetes_get_cluster. The action verb 'Create' and resource 'Kubernetes (Kapsule) cluster' are specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly notes that pools are added separately, guiding the agent on the correct workflow. However, it does not mention when to use this tool over alternative creation methods (e.g., multicloud), though no sibling directly competes. The guidance is clear but could be more explicit about prerequisites or alternative paths.

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