ako_clusters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. Description adds behavioral details: requires kubectl on PATH, iterates contexts, probes avi-system namespace, returns a table of specific fields. 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?

Concise (~100 words), well-structured with a clear summary line followed by detailed explanation of behavior and usage. Every sentence adds value.

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 an output schema (implied), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, return information, and links to sibling tools. Fully adequate for a simple discovery 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?

No parameters (0 params, 100% schema coverage). The description adds meaning by explicitly stating there are no parameters and explaining the implications (all contexts checked, no filtering). Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 the verb ('List'), the resource ('every Kubernetes context in the active kubeconfig'), and the specific scope ('whether AKO is deployed there'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ako_status by noting it discovers context names.

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?

Explicitly states no parameters or filtering, warns about latency from unreachable clusters, and suggests using the results as input to other tools ('Start here to discover context names, then pass one as `context` to...').

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