list_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description effectively discloses behavioral traits: newest-first order, the meaning of three statuses (database, cached, archive), and time cost for archive versions. No contradictions exist.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose sentence, bulleted details, and a usage recommendation. It is concise with no redundant information, though slightly more compacting is possible.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description fully explains the output (list of versions with status meanings) and connects to sibling tools, making the tool's usage context 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema's own parameter description ('Specification ID (e.g. TS 23.501)'). Baseline of 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 explicitly states 'List the versions of a 3GPP specification, newest first' – a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_specs (list specifications) and list_images (list images).

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 explicit context for use: 'Pass a version from this list to get_section or get_toc to read a past version.' This guides when to use the tool, but does not explicitly exclude scenarios where it should not be used.

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