upgrade_tkc_cluster

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=false), the description discloses that the operation is asynchronous, irreversible (cannot downgrade), and has no dry run. This provides critical behavioral context that annotations alone do not convey.

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 (6 sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and structured with a summary, behavioral notes, and parameter details. No superfluous text.

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 (async, irreversible) and no output schema, the description provides complete guidance: what it does, returns, monitoring steps, alternative tools, and parameter meanings. It equips an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 description includes an Args section that explains each parameter: name (via list_tkc_clusters), namespace, k8s_version (from get_tkc_available_versions), and target (vCenter config.yaml). This adds significant meaning despite the input schema having 0% description coverage.

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 tool upgrades a TKC cluster to a new Kubernetes version using a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like scale_tkc_cluster and provides context on what it does not do (e.g., node count changes).

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 states to use this tool only for K8s version upgrades, prefers scale_tkc_cluster for node counts, and provides monitoring instructions (poll get_tkc_cluster). It also notes the asynchronous and irreversible nature.

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