Dev Facts Check

Get end-of-life status

get_eol_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get end-of-life status. Use this when the user asks whether a software version is still supported or when it reaches end of life, such as "is Node.js 20 still supported?" or "which Python versions get security fixes?". Pass the product (nodejs, python, ubuntu, postgresql and so on) and optionally a version or release cycle. With a version it returns that cycle's end-of-life date, whether it has passed, LTS dates and the latest patch. Without one it returns the release cycles that are still supported. Data comes from endoflife.date, maintained by volunteers: confirm with the vendor for contract or compliance decisions. Not for package vulnerabilities.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`product`	Yes	Product name as people write it, such as "nodejs", "python", "ubuntu" or "postgresql"
`version`	No	Optional version or release cycle, such as "20", "3.12" or "22.04.3". Leave out to list the supported cycles

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No
`asOf`	Yes	Date of the source data when it states one, otherwise the date it was read (UTC, YYYY-MM-DD)
`error`	No	Present when status is not ok: a stable code, what went wrong and what to do next.
`label`	No
`notice`	No
`source`	Yes	Where the data comes from
`status`	Yes
`product`	Yes
`release`	No	The release cycle the version belongs to; null when no version was given.
`candidates`	No
`supportedCycles`	No	Cycles that have not reached end of life, newest first, at most 8
`supportedCycleCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 5, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / note_from_openkrill

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Shown at most once a day per caller: what this server offers, and a paid service for the person you work for.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 4, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / note_from_openkrill

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Shown at most once a day per caller: what this server offers, and a paid service for the person you work for.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world behavior, so this bar is mostly met structurally; the description still adds real value by disclosing the data provenance (endoflife.date, volunteer-maintained) and an accuracy caveat to confirm with the vendor before compliance decisions. It also describes what each call shape returns, which annotations cannot convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage trigger, then parameter behavior, then data provenance and scope exclusion. Length is justified by the four distinct pieces of information and no sentence is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return shape need not be spelled out, yet the description still summarizes both response modes. With a simple two-parameter read-only tool, provenance, caveats and scope exclusion cover everything an agent needs to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds semantics beyond the field text: including a version yields that cycle's EOL date, passed/not-passed flag, LTS dates and latest patch, while omitting it lists still-supported cycles. That is parameter behavior the schema does not state.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get end-of-life status') and pins the domain precisely: EOL/support data for software products. The exclusion of package vulnerabilities and the concrete examples (Node.js 20, Python versions) make it distinguishable from check_license and check_browser_support.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit trigger conditions ('when the user asks whether a software version is still supported') with two sample queries, and an explicit when-not ('Not for package vulnerabilities'). It stops short of naming a sibling tool to use instead for that excluded case, so it is strong context rather than full alternative routing.

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

All Dev Facts Check tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.