github_packages_get_package_version_for_authenticated_user

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

The description only says 'Get', implying a read-only operation, but no annotations are provided. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, error handling, or response format. The burden of transparency is unmet.

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 extraneous words. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

Given the complexity of the GitHub Packages API and the presence of many sibling tools, the description lacks essential context. It does not explain the return value, which is crucial since there is no output schema. It also fails to specify that this tool retrieves a specific version by ID for the authenticated user, limiting its completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, but each parameter description is merely its name (e.g., 'package_type'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, achieving the baseline of 3.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'a package version for the authenticated user', indicating a read operation. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_package_version_for_org' or 'get_package_version_for_user', which have similar purposes but different scopes.

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 other package version retrieval tools. There is no mention of context like authenticated user requirement or exclusion of organization scenarios.

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