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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: versions are immutable, numbered from 1, earlier versions are editor-only, and the live link follows the app's access setting. This helps the agent understand what the operation exposes without claiming any mutation.

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?

Four sentences, all earning their place: core purpose, ordering, visibility/access context, and pagination. No filler or repetition of 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?

The description is complete enough for selecting and invoking the tool safely: it covers ordering, immutability, access behavior, and pagination. The only minor gap is that there is no explicit description of the return shape, but no output schema exists and 'List versions' makes the expected return type reasonably inferable.

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%, so the schema already documents app_id, limit, and cursor. The description mentions the next_cursor pagination pattern, but this largely duplicates the cursor field's schema description rather than adding new parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List an app's versions, newest first.' The collection scope clearly distinguishes it from sibling read_app_version (single version fetch) and publish_app_version (creation).

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 clear context for pagination with next_cursor, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over read_app_version or publish_app_version. Usage is implied rather than directly stated, so it earns the minimum viable score.

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