getLibraryVersions

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 only implies a read operation ('Get') but discloses no behavioral details: no mention of return format, pagination, rate limits, authentication, or error behavior. The description is minimal and does not compensate for missing annotations.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No extraneous words or redundant information. It is efficiently structured.

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 description is minimally adequate given the tool's simplicity and full schema coverage. However, it omits details about the output format, potential limit on number of versions returned, and error conditions. With no output schema, more explanation would improve usability.

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 100%—both parameters already have clear descriptions in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline is 3, and no extra value is added.

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 'all available versions for a Maven library'. This distinguishes the tool from its siblings (e.g., getLatestVersion returns only the latest, searchArtifacts is broader) without needing explicit references.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like searchArtifacts or getLatestVersion. It lacks any contextual hints about prerequisites, scope, or preference criteria.

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