List published versions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the output is sorted newest first and includes release dates, which is useful behavioral context. It does not describe error handling or pagination, but for a read-only listing tool, the description provides adequate transparency.

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 with no filler. The first sentence states the primary function, and the second gives concrete use cases. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the essential 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?

The description covers purpose, sorting, and use cases, and names the related sibling tool. It does not describe the exact return structure, but there is no output schema and the tool is simple. The guidance for discovering from/to values makes the context sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it 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?

The input schema already describes both parameters: package name and limit with default 40. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the schema does the heavy lifting. Baseline 3 is appropriate because schema coverage is 100%.

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 the tool lists published versions of an npm package with release dates, sorted newest first. This is a specific verb ('list') plus resource ('published versions of an npm package') and scope ('release dates, newest first'), and it clearly distinguishes from siblings like breaking_changes_between and changelog_between.

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 explicitly says to use it before calling breaking_changes_between to discover valid from/to values, and also to see how far behind an installed version is. This names a sibling tool and a concrete use case, which is clear guidance on when to use it.

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