mort_version

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description bears the full burden. The verb 'Report' implies a read-only, side-effect-free operation, and the phrase 'where it was found' usefully discloses that the tool performs discovery of the compiler's location. However, it says nothing about what happens if no Mort compiler is installed (error vs. empty result), which is the main behavioral edge case for this tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that enumerates the outputs in a natural order (version, language version, location) with no filler, hedging, or repeated 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?

With zero parameters and an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it correctly avoids doing so while still previewing the three reported facts. The only missing piece is fallback/error behavior when no compiler is found, which is a modest gap for a tool this simple.

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 takes no parameters, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to clarify and the baseline of 4 applies. The description's enumeration of the three reported items is a small bonus rather than a compensation for any schema gap.

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 names a specific verb ('Report') and a concrete payload: the Mort compiler version, the language version, and the location where the compiler was found. That is well beyond a restatement of the name 'mort_version', and it tells an agent this is an informational lookup rather than a build/run tool like the siblings mort_run or mort_emit_c.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool to call when it needs version/diagnostic environment info, but the description states no explicit when-to-use condition, no prerequisites, and no exclusions against siblings such as mort_check. For a zero-parameter informational tool the ambiguity is low, so implied guidance is adequate but not strong.

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