get_policy_version_diff

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

Without annotations, the description adds the key behavioral detail of returning a 404 when the version is the first scrape, and specifies the diff type (line+word). It does not cover other potential traits like auth or rate limits, but for a read-only diff tool this is adequate.

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?

Two short sentences; the first states the action and scope, the second notes an important edge case. No wasted words.

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 simple single-parameter tool and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and a key error condition. It lacks explicit output format details, but the 'line+word diff' phrasing gives a general idea.

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 only parameter, versionId, has a 100% schema description that already explains its purpose. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Description states the specific operation: getting a line+word diff between two consecutive versions of the same app. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like compare_apps (which compares apps) by specifying 'for the same app' and 'immediately before it.'

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 the tool is for viewing changes between adjacent versions, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools like compare_apps exist, but no exclusions are provided.

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