get-runbook-versions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what the response contains (e.g., array of versions, metadata), how versions are ordered, or any potential limitations. The word 'Get' implies retrieval but leaves much undisclosed.

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, 'Get all versions of a runbook,' containing no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource effectively, making it easy to parse.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is extremely bare. It does not explain what a version consists of, whether an empty list is possible, or how it relates to get-runbook-version. For an AI agent, this is the minimum viable description but lacks sufficient context to ensure correct invocation and interpretation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate. It refers to 'a runbook' but does not explain what runbook_id is, its format, or any additional meaning. The parameter name itself is self-explanatory, but the description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema.

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 'Get all versions of a runbook.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('all versions of a runbook'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get-runbook-version (which likely gets a single version) and get-runbook (which gets a runbook itself).

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 such as get-runbook-version or get-runbook. It does not mention version history, ordering, or any context that would help an agent decide between version-related endpoints.

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