Contract Testing: Get Released Versions for Version

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 description does not need to add safety traits. The description adds minimal extra behavior, stating it retrieves 'release records' but no details on side effects, pagination, or return format. 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 description is short and starts with the purpose. However, it includes a redundant 'Toolset' line and a parameter list that duplicates the schema. These add no value and could be removed. Overall, it is adequate but not optimally concise.

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?

With 3 required parameters, 100% schema coverage, and annotations present, the description provides the basic purpose. However, it lacks details about the output format (no output schema), and the term 'release records' is not defined. For a simple read tool, this is minimally complete but could be improved.

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% (all parameters have descriptions in the input schema). The description repeats the parameter list verbatim, adding no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Therefore, the description does not enhance parameter understanding beyond the baseline.

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 clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'release records for a specific pacticipant version in a specific environment.' The title reinforces this. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_deployed_versions_for_version, which are conceptually different. Score 4 because it is clear but lacks 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 implies when to use: to retrieve release records for a version in an environment. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use or mention alternatives. Given the simplicity of the operation, the lack of explicit guidance is acceptable but not ideal. Score 3.

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