get_version

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

No annotations are present, so the description must handle transparency. While 'Show' implies a read-only operation, it does not disclose whether device credentials are required, whether it modifies device state, or any potential side effects like timeouts. It adds little beyond the obvious non-mutating nature of the command.

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, short sentence that is directly to the point. It includes the CLI command in quotes for additional clarity without any filler. This is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. However, the lack of any parameter clarification and the absence of usage guidance leave notable gaps. The description names the action but leaves the device parameter's semantics and tool selection context unexplained.

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 schema has one required parameter 'device' with no description, and the description does not mention this parameter at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description was expected to explain what 'device' refers to (e.g., hostname, IP address) and how it is used. It fails to add any meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Show' and identifies the resource as 'hardware/software version info'. It also includes the CLI command 'show version' in quotes, which clarifies the exact operation. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_inventory_hw or run_show_command.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_show_command or get_inventory_hw. The intended usage is implied by the tool name and the parenthetical 'show version', but there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations. Thus it earns a 3 for implied usage without explicit direction.

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