get_model_version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get' strongly implies a read-only lookup, and the description also disloses what the response covers: stage, metrics, and run info. It does not discuss error or auth behavior, but this is acceptable for a low-risk retrieval.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every phrase earns its place, listing the retured detail categories without filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter retrieval, the description is sufficient to orient an agent and the schema covers the required arguments. Since there is no output schema, the mention of stage, metrics, and run info provides a useful minimal indicator of the response contents.

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 already provides 100% coverage for modelName and version, so the description needs to add little for parameters. It does not add syntax hints or clarify the relationship between the two parameters beyond the schema definitions.

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?

States a precise verb and resource: 'Get details of a specific model version', and enumerates the key content attributes (stage, metrics, and run info). It clearly distinguishes this from list-style sibling tools like get_registered_models and get_mlflow_runs.

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 this tool should be used when retrieving a single model version's details, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives for listing versions or comparing runs. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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