Get Server Info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that it never contacts Brightspace and never returns secrets, and flags conditional fields (browser sign-in saved, when signed in). It stops short of stating response format or failure modes, but the safety profile is clearly communicated.

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?

Content is not padded, but it is delivered as one very long run-on sentence enumerating many return fields, which is hard to scan. The headline (which version is running) is front-loaded, but the middle clumps together unrelated details.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, which is exactly what an agent needs to interpret results. It covers version, environment, config, identity, and counters adequately for a diagnostic tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is no parameter semantics to add, and the schema confirms an empty object.

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?

States a specific verb ('Report') and enumerates exactly what is reported (server version, Node runtime, platform, config path, timezone, account identity, request counters). This is unmistakably distinct from the Brightspace data-retrieval siblings like get_my_courses or get_announcements.

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?

Gives explicit triggers: troubleshooting, user asking which version they have, or checking what timezone/account dates compute against. It also implicitly routes away from the data siblings by noting it 'never contacts Brightspace', though it does not name an explicit alternative tool.

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