Get Addon Versions

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits like read-only status, side effects, or rate limits. It only states what is returned, not any constraints or error conditions. Pagination and sorting are implied by parameters but not described. The description adds minimal value beyond the basic action.

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 very concise: two sentences, front-loaded with core purpose. The second sentence adds output details efficiently. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points) and could be slightly more organized, but overall it is not wasteful.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is significantly incomplete. It does not explain pagination (page, per_page), filtering (sort, include), or error handling. The output is partially described but missing details on full response structure. The description leaves many gaps for an agent.

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 60%, meaning some parameters have descriptions (e.g., sort, include, addon_id), but the tool description adds no parameter-level detail. It does not explain how to use sort values, include options, or pagination. The description merely lists output fields, which are not parameters.

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 'Get the full version history for an addon', which is a specific verb and resource. It also lists included data (mod version constraints, download counts, file sizes), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_mod_versions (which likely targets mods) and get_addon (returns addon details, not history).

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. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or preferred contexts. The phrase 'for an addon' implies a use case, but siblings like get_mod_versions or get_addon could overlap, and no comparison is provided.

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