Get Live Version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' signals a read operation, and the production context adds meaning, but the description does not explicitly state that there are no side effects, what permissions are needed, or any other behavioral constraints. For a simple getter this is minimally adequate but not rich.

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 with no filler; the core operation is front-loaded and the second sentence adds a practical use cue. Everything present earns its place.

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, has fully documented parameters, and has an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the key contextual distinction from other version tools; only an explicit pointer to alternatives would make it fully 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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are individually documented in the schema, so the description does not need to repeat their meanings. It adds no direct parameter-level detail beyond naming the container and account context, which matches the baseline for fully covered schemas.

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 names a specific verb and resource: retrieving the container version currently published to production. It further distinguishes itself from generic version tools by clarifying that this is what visitors to the site are actually running, which makes its purpose unambiguous among many sibling version-related tools.

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?

It gives a clear use case: the right starting point for 'what is live right now.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance, but the intended context is evident.

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