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

The description is consistent with the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, not destructive). It doesn't elaborate on side effects, but the annotations already cover these aspects, and the description adds no contradictory information.

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 a single, concise sentence that conveys all necessary information without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does. It is complete and leaves no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 tool has no parameters, so the schema coverage is complete. The description correctly omits any parameter explanations, as there is nothing to add beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: showing current MCP platform and adapter versions. It uses the verb 'show' and specifies the resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'authenticate' or 'connect'.

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?

While the description doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, the purpose is unambiguous and there is no competing tool for retrieving version info. The context of sibling tools makes usage obvious.

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