get_top_os_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 behavioral disclosure. It adds the 'unique sessions' metric and period scope but does not mention sorting, limits, default period, return format, or any operational caveats. Minimal context beyond what the name implies.

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 redundancy; every word contributes to the core meaning. However, it is a fragment rather than a full sentence and is under-specified, which slightly reduces the structural quality.

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?

This is a complex analytics tool with 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The one-sentence description does not explain the return shape, default period behavior, filtering defaults, or how it relates to sibling tools. Inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's usage context.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the 11 parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description itself adds no extra parameter semantics, but the schema fully documents each parameter's purpose and constraints, so no significant gap exists.

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 specifies the resource (top OS versions), the metric (unique sessions), and the time scope (period). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_top_os (which likely groups by OS name) and get_top_app_versions (which focuses on app 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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_top_os or other top_* tools. It lacks any explicit context, alternatives, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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