retell_get_agent_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 It adds a meaningful distinction by stating 'published versions', implying that unpublished/draft versions are excluded. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as read-only nature, ordering, pagination, or error behavior. For a simple retrieval tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no redundant or filler content. It is effectively concise.

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?

This is a simple tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema. The description sufficiently explains what the tool does, and the parameter is fully covered by the schema. While it does not describe the return format, the name and description imply a list of versions, which is adequate for such a straightforward getter.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (agent_id) with a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional parameter context, but since the schema fully documents the parameter, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('all published versions of a Retell AI voice agent'). It distinguishes from siblings like retell_get_agent (gets a single agent) and retell_publish_agent (publishes a version). The action and scope are unambiguous.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when the agent needs to retrieve the published version history of a voice agent. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is straightforward and the sibling tools such as retell_get_agent or retell_publish_agent are obviously different. For a simple getter, this provides sufficient context without needing explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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