set_latest_application_version

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It does disclose the core behavioral effect ('controls which version is considered current') and lists return values, but omits potential side effects like reversibility, what happens to previous 'latest' versions, or any required permissions. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 well-structured: a clear one-sentence purpose, a brief explanation of behavior, and neatly separated Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, with no extraneous content.

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 two-parameter setter with an output schema, the description covers parameters, return values, and use cases. It lacks explicit guidance about how this tool relates to listing versions or any prerequisites, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section thoroughly explains both parameters: application_name is 'Name of the DBOS application' and version_name is 'The version string to set as latest.' This fully compensates for the schema's lack of detail.

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 opens with 'Set the latest version for an application in DBOS Conductor,' a specific verb+resource statement. It further explains that this controls which version is considered current, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tool 'list_application_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 states 'Useful for rolling back to a previous version or promoting a specific version,' giving clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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