server_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool returns ('version and build info') and implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but does not explicitly mention that it has no side effects or require any special permissions. For a simple info tool this is adequate but not rich.

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 sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and context without any filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it highly scannable and efficient.

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 parameterless tool with an output schema, the description fully covers the essential context: what the tool does and why an agent would use it. There is no missing information about parameters or return shape, as the output schema handles the latter.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description correctly focuses on the tool's purpose rather than inventing parameter-related content.

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 uses a specific verb 'Return' and identifies the resource 'server version and build info', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is unique among the listed sibling tools, all of which focus on data listing/retrieval rather than system info.

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 phrase 'to confirm which code is live' provides clear context for when this tool is appropriate. No alternatives or exclusions are needed given the tool's singular, self-contained purpose, and the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when to use it.

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