npmLatest

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior, so the description doesn't need to repeat these. It adds value by specifying what information is retrieved (latest version and changelog), but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, error handling, or output format, which could be useful given the lack of an output schema.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 tool with good annotations (read-only, etc.) and a simple input schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It lacks details on output structure (no output schema provided) and doesn't address potential complexities like handling multiple packages or error cases, which could help the agent use it more effectively.

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%, with the parameter 'packages' clearly documented as a list of package names. The description implies this parameter by mentioning 'an NPM package', but adds no extra semantic details beyond what the schema provides, such as format constraints or examples, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('latest version and changelog of an NPM package'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'npmVersions' or 'npmChangelogAnalysis', which likely provide similar or overlapping functionality, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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. Given the many sibling tools (e.g., 'npmVersions', 'npmChangelogAnalysis', 'npmCompare'), there is no indication of specific contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name alone.

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