list_supported_resources

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the set is dynamic ('currently indexed') and that entries correspond to canonical YAML manifests, but says nothing about read-only safety, ordering, completeness limits, or how indexing relates to sync_upstream_docs. For a zero-parameter read this is adequate but thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope qualifiers ('all', 'currently indexed', 'canonical YAML manifests') all carry information.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value detail is unnecessary, and a no-arg read tool has little else to explain. The only real gap is the missing link to its siblings and to the sync workflow that determines what appears in the list.

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 tool takes no parameters (empty properties object, 100% coverage), so per the rubric there is nothing for the description to clarify and the baseline of 4 applies.

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 and a precisely scoped resource: 'Lists all Kubernetes API resource Kinds currently indexed with canonical YAML manifests.' This clearly separates it from get_canonical_manifest (single manifest retrieval) and search_k8s_docs, though it never names a sibling to contrast with.

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?

Usage is only implied: a discovery/enumeration tool is obviously called before fetching a manifest, and the phrase 'currently indexed' hints the result depends on sync state. The description never states when to use this versus check_api_version or sync_upstream_docs, and gives no prerequisites or exclusions.

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