list_template_versions

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must disclose behavior itself. It only implies a GET (read-only) operation, but says nothing about pagination, sorting, error conditions, or what data is returned. This is a minimal disclosure that does not adequately inform the agent.

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?

While the description is brief, it is under-specified rather than concise. It is a sentence fragment that adds little beyond the tool name, and does not effectively front-load useful information. It does not earn its place because it conveys almost no operational value.

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?

With one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely lacking. An agent has no information about expected input values, output format, or conditions for use, making the tool effectively unusable based on the description alone.

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 schema has one parameter (templateId) with no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description does not mention templateId or explain how it should be used, entirely failing to compensate for the schema's lack of detail.

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 'GET 版本历史列表' states the action (GET) and resource (version history list), which is clear on the surface. However, it is essentially a fragment that restates the tool name (list_template_versions) without adding any nuance or distinguishing it from siblings like list_templates or get_template_detail.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions is provided, leaving the agent without any basis for choosing this over other list/detail tools.

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