list_versions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'List versions' and adds context about release plans, but does not explicitly state it is read-only, explain pagination behavior, or describe the response format. This is a gap for a simple list tool.

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 well-structured, starting with a clear one-line purpose and followed by a short bullet list of use cases. Every sentence earns its place, and it avoids unnecessary detail.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the description covers the main functionality with use cases. However, the overlap with `list_program_versions` is not addressed, and since there is no output schema, the description could provide more context on what a version object includes or how pagination works. Overall, it is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 already documents all parameters. The description's mention of filtering by status and name duplicates the schema without adding new meaning. No additional parameter semantics are provided beyond what the schema gives.

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 tool lists versions for a Yunxiao Project or Program and provides concrete use cases. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling `list_program_versions`, which could cause confusion about which to use for program versions.

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 the tool by listing use cases (list all versions, filter by status, search by name), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `list_program_versions`, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the schema.

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