get_version_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get version info' without indicating whether the operation is read-only, requires a running Premiere Pro instance, or what the response format looks like. This is a significant gap.

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 but includes a boilerplate prefix 'Premiere Pro expanded operation:' that adds no value. The core phrase 'get version info' is minimal and efficient, but the prefix could be removed without losing meaning.

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 a vague description, the tool lacks context. It doesn't clarify what version information is returned, whether the tool depends on a connection, or how it relates to other tools like 'verify_premiere_connection'. For a simple tool, the description is still incomplete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter description needed. The description adds no parameter semantics, but for a parameterless tool this is acceptable. The empty schema with propertyNames is odd, but it doesn't affect parameter clarity.

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 states the action ('get') and the resource ('version info'), making the purpose clear at a basic level. However, it doesn't elaborate on what kind of version info (app, project, etc.) or distinguish itself from similar tools, though no sibling tool overlaps directly.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention typical use cases, prerequisites, or context in which the tool is appropriate.

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