Server info

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only information retrieval by listing informational fields, but it never explicitly states that it has no side effects or whether any permissions are required. For a zero-parameter info tool this is acceptable but not fully explicit.

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 compact sentence that efficiently lists the four information categories. It is concise and puts the most concrete item first, though it reads as a series of field names rather than a complete sentence with a verb.

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 and no annotations, the description is the sole documentation. It covers the main content categories but doesn't describe the response shape, types, or the meaning of 'effective blockwright configuration.' This is adequate for a simple info tool but leaves some ambiguity.

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 no parameters, and the input schema has 100% coverage (empty). Per the zero-parameter baseline, the description doesn't need to add parameter information, and it doesn't omit anything relevant.

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 enumerates the specific data returned: Minecraft version, player count, snapshot availability, and blockwright configuration. It identifies the resource (server info) and is distinct from siblings like get_players or list_snapshots, though it lacks an explicit verb and doesn't explicitly contrast with those tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that get_players gives more detailed player data or that list_snapshots handles snapshot-specific operations. The intended use is only implied by the name and listed content.

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