list_versions

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a read-only operation ('List') and mentions a prerequisite, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or whether the session must be active. This adds some context but remains basic.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the prerequisite. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 1-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential: what it does and how to obtain the required input. It could mention the return value shape, but given the simplicity, it is reasonably 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?

The schema already describes session_id fully, but the description adds crucial semantics by explaining that the ID comes from specific prior calls. This helps the agent understand where to obtain the value, going beyond the schema's generic description.

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 lists all available versions of a session's history, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like compare_versions and revert_version by focusing solely on listing versions.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: the session_id must come from a previous call to validate_knowledge or evolve_knowledge. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools, this gives the agent actionable context for when to use this tool.

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