unity_hub_available_releases

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly states the tool lists versions available for download, implying a read-only operation with no side effects. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, authentication) are mentioned, but the simplicity of the tool makes this acceptable.

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 a single, clear sentence that conveys the tool's purpose without any extraneous information. It is perfectly concise and well-structured.

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 simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential information. It might be improved by briefly noting that the output is a list of version strings or similar, but it is sufficiently complete for its complexity level.

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 tool has zero parameters, so input schema coverage is 100% by default. According to guidelines, baseline is 4 for 0 parameters. The description does not add any parameter information because none is needed. This is adequate.

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 tool's purpose: 'List Unity Editor versions available for download from Unity Hub.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Unity Editor versions'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like unity_hub_list_editors by specifying 'available for download', which implies this is about remote versions, not installed ones.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as unity_hub_list_editors (which likely lists installed editors) or other hub-related tools. The description does not mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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