pypi_version

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

The description implies a read-only operation by stating it fetches metadata, but it does not explicitly declare it as non-destructive or disclose potential errors (e.g., package not found) or API behavior. With no annotations, the description is minimally adequate.

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 that efficiently communicates the tool's functionality, front-loading the main action and detailing included metadata with no wasted 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?

The description adequately states the input and data included, but does not describe the output structure or format. Given no output schema, the description could be more complete by hinting at the response shape, but for a simple tool it remains sufficient.

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 input schema already fully describes both parameters with clear descriptions and an example for version. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond confirming the tool's purpose. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'Fetch' with the resource 'metadata for a specific PyPI package version' and enumerates included data (release URLs, upload times, file sizes, digests, yanked status). This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like pypi_package (package overview) and pypi_releases (list 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pypi_package or pypi_releases. It does not state when not to use or any prerequisites.

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