get_php_package

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'latest version' but does not disclose behaviors such as caching, rate limits, error handling when a package is not found, or whether the tool is purely read-only.

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 of 12 words, front-loaded with the essential information. It contains no unnecessary words.

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 low complexity (single parameter, single output), the presence of an output schema covers return values. The description is sufficiently complete, though it could mention what happens on errors or invalid inputs.

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 100% with a single parameter already well-described as 'The Composer package name (vendor/package format)'. The description only adds 'PHP' context, providing marginal value beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 the tool's action ('Get the latest version'), the specific resource ('PHP Composer package'), and the data source ('Packagist'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_npm_package' or 'get_python_package'.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_package_version' or other language-specific tools. While the resource specificity implies usage for PHP Composer packages, no exclusions or context for when not to use it are provided.

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