GetPackageVersions

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

With no annotations, the description adds value by declaring read-only behavior and detailing return fields (versionId, author, updatedAt, etc.) and the opaque content_uri for source retrieval. It lacks info on pagination or error handling but is sufficient for a simple list tool.

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 concise: one sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, scope, and return value details without redundancy. The '[read-only]' prefix immediately signals behavioral safety.

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 low complexity (1 param, no output schema), the description adequately covers the list operation, including version details and the content_uri for source fetching. It could mention pagination or ordering, but is fairly complete.

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 single parameter 'package_name' is described in the schema as 'ABAP package name.' The description does not add additional meaning or context, and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 lists version history of an ABAP package, with specific verb 'List' and resource 'version history'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on version listing and linking to GetPackageVersionSource for source retrieval.

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 '[read-only]' tag indicates safe usage. The description implies use for browsing version history and directs to GetPackageVersionSource for content, providing some guidance. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are stated.

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