parent_software_versions_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds specific pagination behavior (cursor-based) and references the REST endpoint, which goes beyond the annotations and provides useful behavioral context.

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 concise (two sentences plus a link), front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's simplicity (list endpoint, no output schema), the description adequately explains pagination and provides a link to the full API spec. It is complete enough for an AI agent to use 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 input schema has 67% description coverage, with limit and cursor well-described. The description reinforces cursor pagination but does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. A score of 3 is appropriate as the description adds minimal extra value for parameters.

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 'List known versions of a parent software' with a concrete example (Jira versions). It distinguishes this listing tool from sibling tools that fetch specific versions (parent_software_version_by_build, parent_software_version_by_number).

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 mentions pagination and provides a spec link, offering clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use parent_software_versions_list vs app_software_versions_list), though the naming implies the scope.

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