pre_release_versions__builds__list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, ensuring the agent knows this is safe. The description adds no behavioral insights beyond the endpoint URL; it doesn't mention pagination behavior, rate limits, or response format. It fails to add value beyond the 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?

The description is a single sentence plus the endpoint, conveying the core purpose without extra words. Every part earns its place; it is front-loaded with the action and resource. No fluff or redundancy.

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 low complexity, good annotations, and full schema coverage, the description provides the essential purpose. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not clarify what the response contains (e.g., build details, pagination info). It is minimally adequate but could be more helpful by mentioning the response structure.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents all three parameters (id, limit, next_url). The description does not add any extra meaning or usage hints for these parameters. According to the guidelines, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high, and no additional parameter info is provided.

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 tool's specific action: 'List the builds belonging to a pre release version.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like builds__list (all builds) and pre_release_versions__list (different resource). The verb 'list' and resource 'builds of a pre release version' are precise.

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 implies usage context (when you need to fetch builds for a pre-release version) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives. Sibling tools exist, and there is no mention of trade-offs or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the purpose alone.

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