npm_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists versions but doesn't mention key traits like whether it's read-only, safe to use, or has rate limits. It also omits details about output format, such as what 'recent' means or how versions are ordered, which is crucial for a tool with no output schema.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse and understand quickly.

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 complexity of listing package versions, the lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain behavioral aspects like safety, output format, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for the agent to navigate without additional context.

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 description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides, as schema description coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema adequately documents the parameters, though the description doesn't enhance understanding further.

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 action ('List') and resource ('recent versions of an npm package'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like npm_info or npm_compare, which might also provide version-related information, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like npm_info or npm_compare. It lacks any context about prerequisites, such as needing a package name, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone.

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