nexus_v3_dependencies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the 'Currently experimental' caveat, which is useful stability context but no detail on pagination, response shape, or failure behavior.

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?

A single compact sentence that leads with the verb and resource and ends with the experimental caveat. Nothing is wasted, though it is terse enough that key routing and flag semantics are omitted.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but leaves the `resolved` flag's exact effect and any sibling-routing guidance unstated. Adequate, but with visible gaps.

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 50%: fileVersionId carries a strong description, while `resolved` has only a type and default. The description partially compensates by contrasting 'raw dependency definitions' with 'resolved version-range candidates', implying what `resolved` toggles, but it never states which value yields which output.

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 (Get) and resource (API v3 raw dependency definitions / resolved version-range candidates), and the scoping key (GLOBAL file version ID). It distinguishes raw vs resolved output modes, so an agent understands the subject matter without opening the schema, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby siblings like nexus_v3_file_version.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The description never says which situation should drive the `resolved` flag, leaving the agent to infer its purpose from the phrase 'resolved version-range candidates'.

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