agy_get_changelog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. The verb 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, which is appropriate. However, the description does not disclose any potential caveats such as network access, output format, or whether it returns the full history in one call. Given the simplicity of the operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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 with no redundant words. The main verb and object are front-loaded, and every word contributes meaning.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters) and clear purpose, the description is mostly complete. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not specify the return format (e.g., plain text, structured list, paginated). For a changelog retrieval tool, this is a minor gap, but the overall context is sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially covered. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but none are needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 the specific verb 'Retrieve' with a clear resource ('official release notes and changelog history of the Antigravity CLI'), making its purpose unambiguous. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools, none of which mention changelog or release notes.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives is provided. However, the purpose itself implies usage whenever the user needs Antigravity CLI release notes or changelog. There are no competing sibling tools for this resource, so the implied usage is sufficient.

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