list_releases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what a release is and that full metadata is returned, which gives some context. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, permissions, or pagination/limits. The 'List' verb implies read-only but more detail would improve transparency.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. It provides necessary context about UiPath releases and the sibling tool in four sentences, plus an Args line. No wasted words and easy to scan.

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 list operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, key terminology, and usage differentiation. The output schema likely documents return values, so that detail is not needed here. Minor gaps like error handling are not expected for a tool of this simplicity.

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 schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description includes an Args section explaining folder_name as 'the display name of the folder.' This adds meaning beyond the schema's property definition. For a single parameter, this is adequate compensation.

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 a specific action ('List') on a specific resource ('releases') with scope ('in a folder'). It also distinguishes from sibling get_orchestrator_summary by noting that the summary only returns process names, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly references sibling get_orchestrator_summary and states when to use list_releases instead: when needing release keys (GUIDs), package versions, entry points, or deployment metadata. This provides clear when-to vs. when-not-to guidance.

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