list_versions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the non-obvious breadth of the result set, including prereleases, the development snapshot, and archived unsupported releases, which an agent would not otherwise assume. It does not explicitly state that it is read-only or side-effect free.

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?

Front-loaded statement of what is listed, followed by a compact enumeration of the included categories; every sentence earns its place. Slightly redundant in repeating 'versions' twice, but no real waste.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure needn't be explained, and with zero parameters and no side effects there is little else an agent must know. The only gap is that it doesn't tell the agent that the listed versions are intended as inputs to the sibling doc-fetching tools.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline is 4. No per-parameter meaning is needed or missing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List every PostgreSQL documentation version available online') and immediately bounds the scope to supported releases, prereleases, dev snapshot, and archived releases. It doesn't name a sibling, but the purpose is self-evidently distinct from search_docs and get_doc_page.

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?

Usage is only implied: the natural inference is 'call this first to discover which version identifiers the other tools accept,' but the description never says that or mentions how it relates to search_docs/get_doc_page. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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