List Stack Versions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to reiterate that. The description adds behavioral details: list newest first, shows statuses (draft/confirmed/applied), change summaries, and timestamps. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise with three effective sentences: the first states the primary action, the second details output, the third gives usage guidance, and the fourth notes the required parameter. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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 input schema provides detailed parameter documentation and annotations cover read-only and open-world hints, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, output content, ordering, and prerequisites. However, the lack of an output schema is not compensated, but this is acceptable for an open-world tool. Minor gap: no mention of pagination or limits.

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 schema description for session_id is very detailed (pattern, format, token suffix warning). The tool description only adds a brief requote of the requirement and format, adding minimal value beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool lists all stack versions for a session, ordered newest first, and specifies the data shown (version number, status, change summaries, timestamps). This is a specific verb-resource combination that is distinct from siblings like stackdiff (compare versions) and stackrollback (rollback).

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: to see design history, review changes between iterations, or find a version number to roll back to. It also mentions a prerequisite (session_id from convoopen). However, it does not mention when not to use it or contrast with alternatives, which would make it a 5.

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