panelica_laravel_apps_get_v1_laravel_php_versions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds useful auth context with 'Required scopes: apps:read', which goes beyond the annotations. The 'Read-only' line is redundant with readOnlyHint, so full credit is not warranted.

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 action, followed by concise HTTP, category, and scope metadata. Minor redundancy exists because 'Read-only' duplicates the annotation and the title repeats 'List PHP versions', preventing a 5.

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 zero-parameter read-only list, the description covers the essential facts: endpoint, category, required scope, and safety. However, it does not distinguish this Laravel-specific PHP versions listing from the global panelica_php_get_v1_php_versions sibling, which is a meaningful selection risk for an agent.

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 has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter ambiguity for the description to resolve. With 0 params, the baseline of 4 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource, 'List PHP versions', and includes the HTTP endpoint so the operation is clear. However, it does not explicitly clarify whether these are Laravel-specific PHP versions, which creates possible confusion with the similarly named sibling panelica_php_get_v1_php_versions.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention panelica_php_get_v1_php_versions at all. The 'Category: Laravel Apps' line and path imply a Laravel context, but the lack of explicit routing or exclusions leaves the agent to infer the right choice.

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