deps_version

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions the type of data returned (links, licenses, advisories), but lacks details on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or response structure. For a read-only query tool, the description adds some transparency beyond the schema.

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?

Single sentence, concise, and front-loaded with the action ('Get detailed info'). No unnecessary words. Could potentially add more detail without losing conciseness, but current structure is efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should compensate by detailing the return value. It mentions three categories of data but not structure or fields. Given the complexity of sibling tools, more context would help, but the description is adequate for a simple version lookup.

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 describes all 3 parameters with full coverage. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, such as allowed ecosystem values or version format conventions. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Get detailed info' and the resource 'specific package version from deps.dev', listing included data (links, licenses, advisories). It differentiates from sibling tools like deps_package or deps_advisory by focusing on a single version's details.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like deps_dependencies or deps_advisory. The description does not specify prerequisites, when not to use it, or scenarios where other tools are preferable.

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