get_aseprite_version

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral transparency. It states it gets version info, implying a read-only operation with no side effects. However, it does not disclose the return format (string, object) or any potential permissions needed. With zero annotations, this is minimally adequate but lacks detail.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the key information. No unnecessary words, earning its place.

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 getter, the description is mostly adequate. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not specify the return type (e.g., version string or object). The agent may need to infer from usage. Completeness could be improved by adding return format.

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?

There are no parameters (schema coverage 100% empty). Baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific info, but nothing is needed. The schema already fully defines the parameter set as empty.

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 'Get Aseprite version information' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (Aseprite version). This is a specific verb+resource pair that distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which focus on sprite manipulation, layer management, etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, given there are no sibling tools for version retrieval, usage is implicitly clear: use when version info is needed. Missing explicit when-not or context.

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