get-server-info

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

The description discloses the read-only nature ('Get information') and lists what is returned (counts), providing sufficient behavioral transparency in the absence of annotations.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, no extraneous words.

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 description adequately explains the return content (counts of key elements) even without an output schema; it may be missing other server metadata but is sufficiently complete for its scope.

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?

With no parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds meaning by specifying what information is included (principles, guidelines, etc.), which is a baseline above the empty 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 clearly states the verb 'Get information' and the resource 'this ATAG MCP server' with specific countable items (principles, guidelines, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools that retrieve individual items or lists.

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 use for retrieving server metadata, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide context for prerequisites.

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