telivy_get_agent_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the description conveys the core behavior clearly. However, it does not mention potential response format, error behavior, or any access prerequisites, which are useful for a tool with no schema or annotation context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the action, resource, scope, and platforms efficiently; every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 tool, the description covers the essential details: what is returned and for which platforms. It does not specify the exact return shape or freshness guarantees, but the absence of an output schema and parameters makes the description reasonably complete for 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 tool accepts zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify about parameter behavior. The mention of Windows and Mac is a helpful contextual detail even though it is not parameter-driven. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.

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 ('Get'), a clear resource ('Telivy deep-scan agent versions'), and the platforms covered ('Windows and Mac'). This distinguishes the tool from all sibling tools, which focus on scans, breaches, users, and risk assessments rather than agent version information.

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 tool's purpose implies when to use it — when the agent needs the latest Telivy agent versions — and no sibling appears to overlap with this functionality. However, the description does not explicitly discuss alternatives or exclusions, leaving usage guidance mostly implicit.

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