kiwi_get_versions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' implies a read-only retrieval operation, and the typical filter hints at scoping behavior. However, it does not disclose response shape, pagination behavior, or any other runtime traits, though for a simple list tool this is a moderate gap.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the typical filter guidance is provided immediately afterward, making the description easy to parse.

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 read operation with one optional query parameter, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient. However, there is no output schema and no mention of return values, ordering, or limits, so an agent has to infer what a successful response looks like.

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 documents the query parameter thoroughly, including examples and the omit-to-list-everything behavior, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds a typical filter example, but it is largely redundant and its key 'product' is slightly inconsistent with the schema's 'product_id' example, reducing its additional value.

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 action and resource: 'List product versions.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like kiwi_get_products and kiwi_get_builds, and there is no vagueness about what entity is being retrieved.

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 phrase 'Typical filter: {"product": <product_id>}' provides clear contextual guidance for a common use case. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when-not-to-use, but the unique resource makes the intended usage fairly obvious.

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