ci_xcode_versions_get_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. The 'GET' verb weakly implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but there is no mention of authentication requirements, error behavior for missing ids, or what the response contains.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, which is good, but the duplicate parenthetical '(GET /v1/ciXcodeVersions/{id})' is pure waste. Minimal length here reflects under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and five parameters to manage, the description does nothing to orient the agent about what a 'ciXcodeVersion' resource is or how include/fields interact. It is not complete for a tool of this surface area, though the schema covers parameter-level detail.

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 all five parameters (id, include, limit_macOsVersions, fields_ciMacOsVersions, fields_ciXcodeVersions) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, which matches the baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 is essentially a restatement of the endpoint path already implied by the tool name (ci_xcode_versions_get_instance -> GET /v1/ciXcodeVersions/{id}), formatted as a tautology with the same string duplicated in parentheses. It does convey that a single Xcode version resource is fetched by id, but adds no verb/resource framing beyond the name and no differentiation from siblings like ci_xcode_versions_get_collection.

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?

There is no guidance whatsoever on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ci_xcode_versions_get_collection or ci_xcode_versions_mac_os_versions_get_to_many_relationship. The agent is left to infer entirely from the name that this is the single-instance lookup.

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