list_pipeline_versions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions pagination via 'after' cursor, auto-storage of output, and formatted preview with object ID. However, it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or any destructive aspects. The read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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?

Description includes a clear one-liner for purpose, parameter docs, and then extra sentences about auto-storage and object ID usage. While informative, it could be more concise by integrating the storage note with the return description.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return format (formatted preview with object ID) and pagination. However, it does not describe the schema of each version or cover error scenarios, making it adequate but not thorough.

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 has no descriptions for parameters (coverage 0%), so the description adds essential meaning: 'pipeline_name' as the target pipeline and 'after' as a cursor UUID for pagination. This compensates well for the schema gap.

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 action 'Lists all versions of a pipeline' and specifies ordering 'by version number descending (newest first)'. It distinguishes this from siblings like get_pipeline_version (single version) and list_pipelines (list pipelines).

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 such as get_pipeline_version, search_pipeline_with_filters, or list_pipeline_search_history. The description does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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