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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds the one genuinely new behavioral fact, that results are ordered newest first, but says nothing about default result count or that results are capped, leaving the agent to discover the limit parameter's effect.

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 twelve-word sentence that is front-loaded with the resource and ends with the ordering constraint. No filler and nothing that could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 one-parameter read-only tool this is largely sufficient: the description conveys that each result pairs a release with its changes, and the ordering is specified. With no output schema, slightly more detail about what a release entry contains (version identifier, date) would close the remaining gap.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the limit field documented as 'How many releases to list' plus default 3 and a 1-10 range. The description adds nothing beyond the schema here, so the baseline 3 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?

The description has a specific verb ('releases') plus resource ('Wuai releases') and states the ordering ('newest first'), which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like about_snagcast or get_faq. It does not explicitly name those siblings as alternatives, keeping it just short of a 5.

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: an agent can infer this is the tool for 'what changed recently', but the description never says when to prefer it over about_snagcast or get_faq, and gives no exclusions or prerequisites. Minimum viable guidance.

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