ecp_php_installed_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose details like whether the list is sorted, whether it includes default/alternative PHP versions, or what the output format looks like. The description is accurate but minimal.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the action ('List') and specifies the exact resource. Perfectly concise for a zero-parameter tool.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what the tool does and the scope ('this account's container'). The only minor gap is not describing the output format or whether it includes version details like minor versions, but given the simplicity, this is adequate.

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 there is no parameter semantics burden. The description correctly implies no input is needed. The schema coverage is 100% (empty properties), and the description adds the context of what is being listed, which is sufficient.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('PHP versions installed on this account's container'), which clearly identifies the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from related PHP tools like ecp_php_installed_packages and ecp_php_get_ini by focusing on installed versions, though it doesn't explicitly name those siblings.

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 implies usage context: it's a read-only listing of PHP versions for the current account's container. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like ecp_asdf_list_installed_versions or ecp_php_installed_packages, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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