List versions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds genuinely new context: login is required, results are ordered newest-first, and the state vocabulary (uploading, testing, tested, awaiting_review, approved, rejected, archived) is disclosed. It stops short of covering pagination or behavior when the game slug is invalid, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and ordering, then the routing hint. The long parenthetical field list is dense but each item describes a returned attribute an agent would otherwise have to discover by calling; only the trailing "..." in the state list is slightly loose.

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 output schema, the description correctly takes on the burden of describing return contents, and it does so thoroughly, including auth and ordering. Minor gaps remain around result volume/pagination and error cases for an unknown game, which matter for a list tool.

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% and the single `game` parameter already documents that it accepts a slug or id from gamealia_list_games. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so this sits at the baseline where the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Lists all versions of one game") plus ordering ("newest first") and enumerates exactly what each entry contains (number, state, live flag, release notes, size, autotest status, reject reasons). It also names the sibling it is not (gamealia_get_status), so an agent can separate the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit routing rule: use this for the version list, but use gamealia_get_status for the latest version's full autotest report and the next step. It also states the prerequisite ("needs login"), so an agent knows when the call is even viable.

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