Get server version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns the server version, which implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or response format. The description adds basic context but lacks detailed behavioral information.

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, clear sentence that front-loads the purpose with zero waste. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters, earning its place by succinctly conveying the tool's function.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is complete enough for basic use. It explains what the tool does, but could be enhanced with details on return format or error handling to achieve a perfect score, though it's adequate for this low-complexity context.

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 0 parameters, with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema). The description does not need to add parameter semantics, so a baseline score of 4 is appropriate as it efficiently handles the lack of parameters without unnecessary detail.

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 specific action ('Returns') and resource ('current version of the pdfdancer-mcp server'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get-docs, help, and search-docs which handle documentation rather than server metadata.

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 usage context (checking server version), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. It's clear from the purpose that this is for version queries, but no direct guidance on alternatives or prerequisites is provided.

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