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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not repeat that. The description's verb 'Show' is consistent with these annotations, and it adds the specific resource (MCP platform and adapter versions), which is appropriate. No contradiction, and it doesn't need to disclose more for such a simple operation.

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?

Single concise sentence that fully conveys the action and scope. No extraneous information, and it is front-loaded with the key information.

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 zero-parameter, read-only version display tool with clear annotations, the description is complete. It states exactly what versions it shows. No output schema is needed. The description is sufficient for an agent to know when to call it and what to expect.

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?

Tool has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and the schema has no properties, so there's nothing to elaborate on.

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 it shows the current MCP platform and adapter versions. It is a specific verb ('Show') with a clear resource ('MCP platform and adapter versions'), and it is distinct from sibling tools like connect or marketplace.

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 usage (when you need version info) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide context on when to use this tool. Since there are no obvious alternatives among siblings, the usage is fairly obvious, but the description lacks explicit guidance.

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