List versions

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

Discloses behavior beyond the annotations: versions are immutable, returned newest first, and pagination uses page_token from nextPageToken. This adds practical detail about ordering and iteration 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: core listing behavior, pagination, and downstream usage. Key details are front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 list tool with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description is complete. It identifies the returned fields, ordering, pagination continuation mechanism, and downstream uses, covering what an agent needs to call 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces page_token usage and mentions versionNumber as an output consumers use, but does not significantly add meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Lists the project's immutable versions... newest first.' It clearly identifies the action, target, and ordering, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like get_version and create_version.

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?

Provides clear usage context by explaining when to use this tool, such as picking a versionNumber for manage_deployments or reading old code via get_project_content. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name get_version as the single-version alternative.

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