yaaif_agent_spec_release_dependencies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' and the qualifier 'declared' imply a read-only, non-mutating operation, which is useful. However, it does not disclose potential errors, auth requirements, or whether an empty result is possible.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The core action and key qualifiers ('explicit', 'provider', 'version constraints', 'consumer Scenario') are front-loaded and every word contributes meaning.

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 one-parameter read operation, so the description is not severely inadequate. Still, with no output schema and no explanation of what a 'version constraint' contains or how the result is presented, the agent has limited context for interpreting the response.

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 has a single parameter, spec_id, with 0% description coverage. The description refers to 'this consumer Scenario' but never explicitly connects it to spec_id, leaving the agent to infer that spec_id identifies the consumer Scenario whose dependencies should be listed.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource: explicit provider Scenario version constraints declared by the consumer Scenario. This distinguishes it from generic dependency tools and makes the tool's scope immediately understandable.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as yaaif_agent_spec_dependencies, yaaif_agent_spec_release_dependency_upsert, and yaaif_agent_spec_release_dependency_delete exist, but the description does not explain how this listing tool differs or when each should be preferred.

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