release-check-versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Check' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data versus raw text, or handles errors. For a tool that presumably queries external app stores, this represents significant behavioral gaps.

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 at just 6 words, front-loading the core purpose with zero wasted language. Every word earns its place by specifying both the action and target platforms.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and multiple parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'latest versions' means (version numbers? release dates? changelogs?), what format the results come in, or how the parameters interact (e.g., whether 'app' is required when specifying 'store'). For a tool that queries external APIs, this leaves too much undefined.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 4 parameters thoroughly. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it mentions 'App Store/Google Play' which aligns with the 'store' parameter but provides no additional context about parameter relationships or usage patterns.

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 ('Check latest versions') and target resources ('from App Store/Google Play'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential sibling tools like 'release-create' or 'release-update-notes' that might also interact with release versions.

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. With sibling tools like 'release-create', 'release-pull-notes', and 'release-update-notes' available, there's no indication of when checking versions is appropriate versus creating releases or managing release notes.

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