List OneDrive File Versions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It states the action ('List retained versions') but does not disclose additional behaviors such as read-only nature, permission requirements, pagination, or response format. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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, with a single clear sentence plus a useful Chinese intent translation. Both sentences add value; there is no wordiness or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, but the absence of an output schema and annotations means the description should hint at return values or related tools. It does not explain what the list contains or how it connects to drive_restore_version, leaving some contextual 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (itemId) with a description. The tool description does not add any further explanation about the parameter, so it provides no additional semantic value.

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 specific verb+resource: 'List retained versions of a OneDrive file.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool sharepoint_list_drive_versions, which is for SharePoint. The included Chinese intents further clarify the tool's scope.

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 implies usage for OneDrive files, which differentiates it from the SharePoint counterpart. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, so it lacks full exclusionary guidance.

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