get_server_info

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral context. It indicates a read operation ('Get'), but lacks details about authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. For a simple info tool, this is minimally adequate but does not go beyond the basic implication.

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 very concise, using only a few words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every part contributes to purpose. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., complete sentence), but effective.

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 no output schema, the description explicitly states what the tool returns ('server mode and capabilities'). This is sufficient for a simple, parameterless tool. No missing context for usage.

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?

There are no parameters, so the input schema is trivially fully covered. The description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and no additional info is required.

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 specifies 'Get server mode and capabilities', which clearly indicates the tool's purpose. It uses a verb ('Get') and names the resource ('server mode and capabilities'). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, the name and description imply it's a general server info tool, distinct from branch stats or file operations.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent could infer to use it when needing server capabilities. Lacks mention of exclusions or specific contexts.

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