list-prompt-versions

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

With no annotations, the description must provide behavioral insight. It states 'list all versions' but does not clarify if it returns metadata, content, pagination, or what constitutes a version (e.g., timestamps, authors). The lack of output schema exacerbates the opacity.

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 superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the key action. A minor improvement could be adding a parenthetical to differentiate from siblings, but it is already efficient.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of version IDs, detailed objects) or any context like ordering. For a version listing tool, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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 100% coverage with a descriptive parameter for 'filename'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter description, so it meets the baseline for high coverage without 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 'List all versions of a specific prompt' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (versions of a specific prompt). It naturally distinguishes from siblings like 'get-prompt-version' (single version) and 'list-prompts' (all prompts).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get-prompt-version, compare-prompt-versions). The description lacks context about prerequisites or selecting this over other version-related tools.

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