builds__pre_release_version__get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds the HTTP method and path, which is slightly beyond annotations but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as error handling, authentication requirements, or response format. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

One concise sentence plus endpoint. No filler words, front-loaded with the action. Every element earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, clear annotations), the description is largely adequate. However, it does not explain what a 'pre release version' is or what the response contains, which would be helpful given no output schema. Still, the resource name implies the return value, so it earns a 4.

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% (the 'id' parameter has a description: 'ID from the matching list call.'). The description adds no further parameter semantics, so baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Read' and clearly identifies the resource: 'pre release version for a build'. It includes the endpoint, which clarifies the exact relationship being accessed, distinguishing it from sibling tools like builds__get or pre_release_versions__get.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related tools (e.g., builds__app__get for app relationship) nor any prerequisites or context. The only clue is the endpoint, but explicit usage guidance is missing.

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