list_unit_versions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the read-only nature (listing) and ordering ('newest first'), but does not mention pagination behavior, return format, or error conditions. For a list operation, this is acceptable but not rich.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word is useful. It includes an ordering detail and a practical alternative without unnecessary filler.

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 read-only list operation with two obvious parameters, the description covers the purpose, ordering, and a relevant alternative. It lacks an explicit return-shape description and does not mention the limit parameter, but overall 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% because the description does not mention either parameter (unitId or limit). Although the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema, such as the requirement to provide unitId or the role of limit.

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 'Properties unit snapshots' with an explicit ordering ('newest first'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tools like list_units (which lists units) and restore_unit (which restores snapshots).

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?

It explicitly points to restore_unit as the alternative when an earlier write was wrong, giving a clear usage scenario. It does not fully explain when to use list_unit_versions versus list_units, but the term 'snapshots' implies historical versions, offering some implicit differentiation.

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