get_system_uptime

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format ('JSON string with uptime in various formats') and the specific time units provided (seconds, minutes, hours, days), which is helpful. However, it lacks operational context such as whether this is a lightweight read operation, any caching behavior, or failure modes.

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?

Appropriately sized at two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the purpose ('Get MCP server uptime information'). The second sentence documents the return value in a clear docstring format. No repetition of schema or annotation data.

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 that an output schema exists (per context signals) and there are zero parameters, the description adequately covers the essentials. It explains what the return value contains (uptime in various formats), which compensates for the lack of annotation metadata. Could be improved by noting if this is a safe/read-only operation.

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 zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty object). According to scoring rules, 0 params equals a baseline score of 4. No parameter documentation is required or expected.

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 'Get MCP server uptime information' which provides a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_system_info' or 'get_system_metrics' by focusing specifically on uptime. However, it could clarify what 'MCP server' refers to in this context (the tool server itself vs managed resources).

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 provided on when to use this versus sibling tools like 'get_system_info', 'get_system_metrics', or the various '*_health_check' tools. No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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