aap_get_cluster_status

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

The annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that the return is a JSON string containing instance capacity and health, which is useful context. However, it doesn't mention pagination, error conditions, or any specific fields beyond 'list of instances and their capacity/health'.

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 two sentences. The purpose is front-loaded, and the return type is stated separately. No unnecessary wording.

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 simple read-only status tool with annotations and a clear return description, this is adequately complete. It could benefit from clarifying how it differs from related health/capacity tools, but that gap is more about usage guidance than completeness. The tool has a clear output schema (not shown but present), reducing the need to explain return values.

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?

The input schema has a single 'params' object with no properties, making this effectively a parameterless tool. The description provides no parameter details, but none are needed. The schema itself is self-explanatory. Since there are no meaningful parameters, this is adequate.

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 retrieves AAP cluster node status, capacity, and health summary. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and specifies the resource. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like aap_get_controller_health or aap_list_instances, which might serve similar purposes.

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 such as aap_get_controller_health or aap_get_instance_capacity. The description only states the function, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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