te_promote_versions

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Submit a ... request' but does not explain if the request is asynchronous, what responses or side effects to expect, or any required permissions. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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?

While the description is short (one sentence), it omits essential information, making it under-specified rather than concise. The single sentence could be improved by front-loading key details.

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 has 5 parameters (4 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to correctly invoke the tool, especially regarding parameter usage and expected outcomes.

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 0%, so the description should explain parameters. It does not mention any of the 5 parameters (version_ids, approval_id, comment, custom_property_type_id, raw), leaving the agent with no semantic understanding of what each parameter represents or is used for.

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 includes a specific verb ('Submit') and resource ('Tripwire element version promotion request'), making the primary action unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like te_get_promote_request, which could cause confusion.

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 context such as prerequisites, conditions for promotion, or comparison to other te_* tools.

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