pull_workspace_version

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

Annotations mark it as destructive, and the description confirms by mentioning rollback/import. Adds detail about selector validation (returns available repos on incorrect guess). However, it doesn't specify what exactly gets destroyed or overwritten, but annotations already signal destructiveness.

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?

Well-structured with bold warnings and bullet-like instructions. Front-loaded with main purpose. Could be slightly more concise, but the extra detail is justified for clarity. No redundant sentences.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains the meaningful return field (pulledFromGit) and error handling (returns list of platform repos). It covers the main use cases and retry logic. Could mention the full response structure, but for a 6-param tool with 2 required, it's fairly complete.

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%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by explaining mutual exclusivity of gitPlatform and repositoryId, the retry mechanism, and preference for gitPlatform. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 two distinct actions: pulling from git or rolling back/importing an existing version. It uses specific verbs (pull, roll back, import) and the resource (workspace version). This differentiates it from sibling tools like push_workspace_version or pull_workspace.

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?

Explicit instructions on when to use gitPlatform vs repositoryId, warning that omitting both is only valid for rollback. Includes retry guidance if gitPlatform is unknown. Clearly states when not to call (without selectors) and alternatives (retry with gitPlatform).

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