Get Spec Usage In Docs

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, and the description reinforces it with 'read this' and explains the read operation's purpose. It goes beyond the annotation by clarifying the use case (after publishing) and default behavior (mutable vs published). No contradictions detected.

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 sentences, no redundant wording, and information is front-loaded (purpose first, then use case, then parameter behavior). Very efficient and well-structured.

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?

Provides when to use, what it returns (stale snapshots), default behavior, how to change it, and a prerequisite (project context). It doesn't describe output format or error conditions, but for a simple read operation with no output schema, this is sufficient.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both specId and includePublished. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema; it just restates includePublished's effect. Since schema already carries the load, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a clear purpose: find which documentation versions embed a given API specification. It uses a specific verb (find) and resource (documentation versions + spec) and includes distinguishing details like stale snapshots. This is easy to understand and differentiates from siblings.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: after publishing a spec to see stale snapshots. Also explains default behavior (only mutable versions) and how to modify it with includePublished. Mentions the project context requirement, providing actionable guidance.

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