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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal context about the output contents (slugs, categories, platforms), but since an output schema exists, this is redundant. It does not disclose additional behavioral detail such as sorting behavior or pagination, and does not contradict annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then a concise note on filtering. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition of the tool name or schema details.

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 simplicity, full schema descriptions, annotations, and an output schema, this description is complete enough. It clearly frames the resource and basic filtering, and the output schema handles return value details. No critical gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all three parameters (sort, query, category). The description only mentions 'category and/or a name query', which is a subset of the parameters and adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 this tool lists the products that What's New tracks release notes for, with slugs, categories, and platforms. The verb 'list' plus the resource scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_releases and whats_new.

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 gives filter instructions ('Filter by category and/or a name query') but does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_releases or whats_new. Usage is implied by the purpose, so it falls at 'implied usage' rather than explicit guidance.

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