hedgedoc_list_revisions

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals that each revision entry contains an id (Unix timestamp) and length (chars), the return type is a JSON array, and the id can be used with another tool. It does not disclose error behavior or authentication, but for a read-only listing tool this is adequate.

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary action, then provides necessary detail about output format and usage. Every sentence contributes value, with no redundant information.

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 one-parameter tool, the description fully covers the purpose, the parameter meaning, return structure, and integration with a sibling tool. The presence of an output schema further covers detailed return types, so the description is appropriately 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 only parameter note_id is not described in the schema (0% coverage), but the tool description provides a concise explanation: 'The note ID or alias (the slug from the URL).' This adds semantic meaning beyond the schema and clarifies what the agent should pass.

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 revisions of a HedgeDoc note, using the specific verb 'List' and resource 'revisions.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling hedgedoc_get_revision by implying the listing role and referencing the retrieval tool.

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 provides a clear usage context: list revisions first, then use the revision-id with hedgedoc_get_revision to retrieve content. This effectively tells an agent when to use this tool vs the alternative, though it doesn't explicitly state 'use this to list, not to read.'

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