Get Release History Tool

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this as a safe read, so the safety bar is covered by annotations. The description adds the returned fields (digest, date, source commit), but that information overlaps with the existing output schema, and it says nothing about pagination or ordering.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, and the resource scope is front-loaded so the reader gets the key constraint immediately.

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 read-only listing tool with a full output schema and complete parameter descriptions, this is nearly sufficient. The only real gap is disambiguation from the sibling release tools, which is not needed for correct invocation itself.

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 100%, so name, stream, variant, and limit are already fully documented in the schema. The phrase 'of a stream and variant' loosely maps to two params but adds no format or default detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clear verb+resource+scope: 'List past releases ... of a stream and variant' tells the agent it is a historical listing narrowed by stream and variant. However, it never differentiates itself from the closely-named sibling get_release_details_tool, so the agent must infer which to call.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative is stated. There is an obvious ambiguity with get_release_details_tool (details vs history) that the description leaves entirely unresolved, so guidance is only implicitly available.

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