apache_version

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that the value comes from shelling out to `apachectl -v`, but says nothing about failure behavior when apachectl is missing, or whether the target is local or remote.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with the [READ] marker first and the data source last. Nothing is wasted and no filler is present.

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 trivial read-only probe with no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient, but the entirely unexplained `target` argument leaves a real hole in how to actually invoke the tool. Sibling disambiguation against `apache_build` is also absent.

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 single parameter `target` has 0% schema description coverage and receives no explanation in the description at all — an agent cannot tell whether it is a hostname, a container, or a path to apachectl. With one undocumented parameter, the description needed to compensate and does not.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Get Apache HTTP Server version") and even names the underlying source (`apachectl -v`), so the agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not differentiate from the similar-sounding sibling `apache_build`, which is why it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to call this versus `apache_build`, `apache_probe`, or `apache_diagnose`, nor any preconditions such as requiring apachectl to be installed. Usage is only inferable from the obvious [READ] tag and the word "version".

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