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

The description aligns with the readOnly and idempotent annotations, and 'Show' clearly indicates no side effects. However, it does not add extra context beyond what annotations already convey, such as specific output format or potential edge cases.

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 directly states the tool's function without any unnecessary filler.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently conveys what it does and what it returns (the versions). It is complete for this trivial use case.

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?

There are no parameters in the schema, so the description has nothing to explain. This dimension is trivially satisfied.

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 ('Show') and the resource ('MCP platform and adapter versions'), making it specific and distinguishable from sibling tools that perform actions like authenticate, connect, or CRUD operations on notes.

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 tool's purpose is obvious and unique, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. It implies usage for checking versions, but lacks explicit context about scenarios or prerequisites.

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