Available Updates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it declares read-only behavior ('composer outdated'), states environmental requirements, documents the require-dev filtering workaround and why it exists, and explains the cross-referencing against composer audit. That is unusually rich operational context.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then prerequisites, then the two flags. Well organized, though the parenthetical justifications ('because composer marks none of them itself') add minor length without changing behavior.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure needn't be described, and the description still notes that advisories are attached when security_only is set. For a two-flag read tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does: include_dev is explained as the switch that un-excludes dev dependencies (resolved via require-dev), and security_only is explained as intersecting the outdated list with composer audit advisories and attaching them. Both params gain meaning absent from the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List packages with newer versions available, from composer') and scopes it clearly against sibling tools like composer_audit and composer_update. An agent can identify exactly what this returns without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit prerequisites (composer.json, network access), explains both flags' effects, and names the alternative path: 'The composer_audit tool lists advisories regardless of updates.' When-to-use versus when-to-use-the-other is spelled out.

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