list_unreleased

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Zeigt' (shows) makes it clear this is a read-only operation, and it specifies the exact contents of the response (entries since last release plus the future release version). While it doesn't cover ordering or edge cases, it provides sufficient transparency for a simple list operation.

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, front-loaded German sentence that conveys all essential information without any filler. It is appropriately concise and well-structured.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description provides enough context to understand the tool's purpose and output. It doesn't need to explain return values or elaborate on behavior beyond what is already clear from the description and schema.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema already exhaustively describes the input (empty object). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning because none are needed, aligning with the baseline of 4 for parameterless tools.

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 what the tool does: it lists all entries since the last release and indicates the next release version. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_release or get_current_version, which focus on specific versions rather than the unreleased backlog.

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 implicitly communicates when to use this tool—when you want to see unreleased entries and the upcoming version. However, it offers no explicit comparison or exclusion of alternatives such as search_entries or preview_release, so the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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