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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description adds critical behavioral details: malformed tags return a teaching error rather than crashing, it is a TypeScript port of a specific reference implementation, and it explicitly states no HMAC, no network, no orders, and no wallet/account access. These disclosures go well beyond the annotations.

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 compact—three sentences that cover purpose, example, provenance, error behavior, and safety traits. Each sentence adds unique information with no redundancy.

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?

For a single-parameter sorting utility with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies input, ordering, error behavior, and safety. The absence of an explicit return description is acceptable because the output is intuitively the sorted list, and the annotations already cover read-only semantics.

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 defines a single 'tags' array parameter, and the description adds meaning by showing accepted formats ('v1.9.0' or '1.9.0') and indicating that malformed input is handled gracefully. While it does not enumerate constraints like maxLength or maxItems, the examples and error behavior give the agent enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 action ('Sort supplied version tags') with a specific ordering ('NUMERIC version order') and a concrete example distinguishing it from lexical sorting. It differentiates this tool from siblings by focusing on semver sorting, a unique function among the apex_run_* family.

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 implies when to use the tool—whenever version tags need numeric ordering—and provides an example that clarifies the expected input. However, it never explicitly states alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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