list_product_versions

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

The description discloses that this is a GET request, indicating a read-only operation, which is a meaningful behavioral trait. However, with no annotations provided, it does not go further to describe return format, pagination, or any potential side effects, leaving gaps in 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 a single, concise sentence that includes the Chinese phrase and the URL. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no unnecessary words.

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 the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not explain what a product version is, what fields the response will contain, or any list-level behavior like pagination. The absence of an output schema places more burden on the description to clarify the return value, which it does not fully do.

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 covers the only parameter product_id with a description, but the URL template '{product_id}' in the tool description adds semantic meaning by showing it is a path parameter and how it is used in the endpoint, going beyond the schema's simple label.

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 '取得商品版本列表' (get product version list) clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. The appended URL 'GET /v1/products/{product_id}/versions' further specifies the operation and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_products or get_product.

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. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and URL.

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