list_releases

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates the operation is read-only via '[READ]', describes ordering and truncation behavior for limit, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects on the system.

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 extremely concise: three lines covering purpose, parameters, and behavior. No redundant wording; every sentence adds value and is front-loaded with the key purpose.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required param, limit behavior, and target. It mentions the 'truncated' indicator and defaults. While it could elaborate on return format, it is largely adequate for a list tool.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It specifies 'project' as id or full path, 'limit' with max 99 and truncation indicator, and 'target' as server target name with default behavior. This adds significant context beyond the schema's type information.

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 the verb ('list'), resource ('releases'), scope ('for a project'), and ordering ('newest first'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_artifacts or list_pipelines.

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 explains the required 'project' argument and details the 'limit' and 'target' parameters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings or provide context for exclusion criteria. Usage is implied by resource name but lacks direct guidance.

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