get-prompt-version-by-tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool returns a version with its template and configuration, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential error cases (e.g., missing tag), rate limits, or authentication needs.

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 very concise, containing three efficient sentences: a definition, an example, and the expected return. No unnecessary words, and the format is easy to parse quickly.

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 tool has only two parameters and no output schema or nested objects, reducing complexity. The description covers the core functionality and return shape, but lacks detail on parameter definitions (especially prompt_identifier). For a simple tool, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, and the description adds minimal meaning. The term 'tag name' is clarified, but 'prompt_identifier' is ambiguous (could be ID or name). The example shows using a prompt name, but the schema does not specify format or allowed values. The description should define what prompt_identifier is and how tag_name is used.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves a prompt version by tag and lists returned components (template, model config, invocation params). Example is helpful. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'get-prompt-version' which uses a different identifier.

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 an example usage ('get the production tagged version') which implies when to use. Lacks explicit guidance on when not to use, alternatives, or prerequisites. With many sibling tools (e.g., list-prompt-version-tags, add-prompt-version-tag), more direction would help.

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