check_vks_compatibility

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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds valuable context: vSphere version requirement, specific return fields, and behavior caveat about CONFIGURING clusters. No contradiction.

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?

Well-structured with [READ] tag, clear paragraphs, and args section. Some redundancy (e.g., return fields listed twice), but overall efficient and front-loaded with key purpose.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully details return fields and their subfields, plus usage context. For a single optional parameter tool, this is complete and actionable.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the target parameter refers to a vCenter in config.yaml and default behavior. This adds meaning beyond the schema's minimal 'anyOf string|null'.

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?

Clearly states it checks vCenter support for VKS, with version requirement. Explicitly ties returned data to sibling tools (get_supervisor_status, create_namespace), differentiating its role as a starting point.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Start here' for downstream tools, explains target parameter usage, and warns that clusters may still be CONFIGURING despite vCenter support.

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