Contract Testing: Get Currently Deployed Versions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'currently deployed' state aspect but does not explain pagination behavior or what the returned payload contains; no contradiction with annotations.

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 definition is short and front-loaded, opening with the purpose statement. The toolset label and parameter block are compact, though the parameter details largely duplicate the input schema, preventing a top score.

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 paginated read operation, the description plus rich annotations is mostly sufficient, but it does not clarify whether pagination means 'all versions' are returned at once, and it does not distinguish this from closely named sibling tools. There is no output schema, so a note on the expected response would strengthen completeness.

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%, so the schema fully documents environmentId, pageNumber, and pageSize. The description merely repeats those parameter descriptions and adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('all versions currently deployed to a given environment') and clearly identifies the required environment scope. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools such as get_deployed_versions_for_version or get_currently_supported_versions, so it falls short of full differentiation.

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 choose this tool over its siblings, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives like get_deployed_versions_for_version or list_environments. The only implied context is that an environmentId is needed, which is already in the schema.

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