redmine_version_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals the HTTP GET method, implying a read-only operation, but says nothing about the response shape, error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), authentication needs, or rate limits. This is minimal disclosure.

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, front-loaded with the action ('Get version') and the endpoint. It contains no redundancy or filler, and is appropriately sized for a trivial GET operation.

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 tool is simple, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not state that the response is the full version object, list returned fields, or explain error responses. Given the low complexity, this is a clear gap but not a catastrophic one.

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 schema has a single 'id' parameter with no description (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. The endpoint '/versions/:id.json' does add meaning by indicating the id is the version identifier used in the URL path, but it does not elaborate on the parameter's semantics beyond that.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('version'), and the endpoint '/versions/:id.json' clearly indicates a single-resource fetch. It is distinguishable from siblings like redmine_versions_list (plural, no id) and create/update/delete, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 usage context is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool instead of redmine_versions_list or other alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites like needing a valid version id. The only implication comes from the tool name and endpoint, which falls short of explicit guidance.

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