pdm_version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only diagnostic operation via 'get' and 'DIAGNOSE', but does not detail auth needs, error handling, or whether the call is safe. The config requirement is helpful, but overall transparency is minimal.

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 extremely concise, using two short lines to convey purpose and prerequisites. It front-loads the key information with 'DIAGNOSE (LOW):' and avoids any superfluous text.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the essential purpose and a key prerequisite. However, it could mention that it is a safe, idempotent operation. The tool is simple, so completeness is adequate.

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 100% because the only parameter 'proximo_target' has a thorough description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond mentioning the config requirement, which is not directly about the parameter.

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 the verb 'get', the resource 'PDM appliance version', and lists the specific fields 'release, repoid, version'. The prefix 'DIAGNOSE (LOW)' categorizes the tool. Among siblings, pdm_remote_version exists, so this tool is distinguished as the one for the local appliance.

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 mentions a prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PDM_* config', which guides the agent on when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like pdm_remote_version, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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