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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only states the basic action and permission. It does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or what 'version events' include (e.g., creation, updates). This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or expectations.

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 very concise at one sentence plus a permission note. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it could include more useful information without being overly verbose, so it slightly lacks completeness.

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 has 2 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, pagination, or how to interpret 'version events'. This is inadequate for 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. The description does not explain what 'limit' controls or that 'artifactBundleId' is required. The agent must rely solely on the schema, which is minimal.

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 title and description clearly state the tool lists bundle-level version events. The verb 'list' and resource 'artifact bundle versions' are specific and distinguish it from siblings like rubrkit_list_artifact_bundles and rubrkit_list_file_versions.

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 includes a permission requirement ('Requires artifact_bundles:read for API keys'), providing some context for use. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like rubrkit_list_file_versions, nor does it mention any prerequisites or when not to use it.

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