listVersions

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world hints. The description adds context about data scope (milestone metadata only, not issue scope/risk), which goes beyond annotations and informs the caller about expected results.

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 tightly packed sentences with zero fluff: the first establishes purpose and key output, the second clarifies exclusions and routes to alternatives. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with a defined output schema and annotations covering safety and open-world semantics, the description fully covers purpose, exclusions, and alternatives. No missing critical information.

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% (projectId has a description), so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'of one project' but adds no extra syntax or parameter behavior beyond the schema's own documentation.

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 a clear verb ('Discover') and resource ('versions/milestones of one project'), and explicitly notes what it returns (IDs for filters/analytics) and what it does not (scope or risk), distinguishing it from siblings by name.

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?

It names the alternatives (getVersionChangelog, getReleaseRisks) and the conditions for choosing them, giving explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance without ambiguity.

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