get_release

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

The verb 'zeigt' (shows) implies a read-only operation, which is a useful behavioral hint. However, with no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden, and it does not mention potential errors, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether a missing release returns an error. The read-only implication is the main transparent element.

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 concise sentence that clearly states what the tool does. Every word contributes to the purpose, with no repetition or filler. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 simple retrievial tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description is somewhat adequate. However, it does not explain how the version parameter identifies the release or what happens if the release is not found. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the description remains thin on usage context.

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 description coverage is 0% since the single 'version' parameter has no description. The tool description does not mention the version parameter or explain its format/meaning. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of information.

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 'Zeigt einen Release mit Zusammenfassung und allen gebündelten Einträgen' clearly states the tool shows a release including summary and bundled entries, using the specific verb 'shows' and resource 'release'. This is clear but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like preview_release or list_unreleased, though the mention of summary and entries adds specificity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or references to sibling tools, so the agent receives no decision support.

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