Get Versioning Strategy

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful context about the returned data (version aliases) and the prerequisite (project context), but does not add explicit read-only wording. Since the annotation covers the safety aspect, this is adequate but not highly detailed.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the essential information without redundancy.

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 description is complete for this simple read operation. It mentions the key requirement (project context) and the specific content (versioning strategy, version aliases). No additional information is needed for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 sole parameter specId is clearly described as 'Public ID (GUID) of the API specification', providing complete and unambiguous meaning. There is no ambiguity about what value to supply.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'versioning strategy' for an API specification. It also mentions 'including version aliases', which adds specificity and distinguishes it from related tools like get_version and compare_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 notes 'Requires project context', which is a useful usage hint. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_version or compare_versions, though the name and description make the purpose fairly obvious.

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