app_version_listings_list_all

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds beyond annotations: reveals cursor pagination (despite the name), describes pagination token usage, and notes that unknown filter values return empty list instead of error. This fully informs the agent of key behaviors.

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?

Every sentence adds value: return structure, pagination nuance, filter details, and a reference link. No fluff, well-organized, and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

For a paginated list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers return structure (links, versions with specific fields), pagination mechanism, and filter options. Combined with annotations, an agent has enough to use this tool 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?

Schema coverage is 80% (4 of 5 parameters documented). The description adds context for cursor (pass from links.next) and clarifies filter behavior (narrow at payload level). However, appSoftwareId lacks description in both schema and tool description, slightly reducing clarity.

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 it lists version-listings for an app-software, enumerating the returned metadata fields (screenshots, highlights, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like app_version_listing_get (single) and app_version_listing_update by focusing on the list-all operation.

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?

Provides guidance on pagination (cursor-based, default 10/page) and filtering by state and approvalStatus, including edge case behavior for unknown values. Does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like app_version_listing_get, but gives sufficient context for typical use.

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