count_schema_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Count the number of versions' implies a read-only operation, but it does not clarify behavior for missing subjects, registry/context resolution, or whether deleted/soft-deleted versions are included.

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 short, front-loaded, and has no wasted words. It is concise, but it achieves this by sacrificing necessary context, so it is not fully optimal.

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?

The description is too minimal for a tool with three parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a closely related sibling (get_schema_versions). It lacks essential details about parameter roles, return value, and when this tool is the right choice.

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 0% and the description does not compensate. It only alludes to 'a specific schema' without explaining the subject, context, or registry parameters, so an agent cannot reliably determine what values to provide.

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 states a clear verb and resource: count versions for a schema. It is specific enough to convey the core operation, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling get_schema_versions, so an agent may not immediately know which to choose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_schema_versions or get_schema. No alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the correct context.

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