get_version

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description confirms it returns version info with no side effects, adding no contradictions. It effectively discloses the behavioral trait of returning version data.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose, with no wasted text. It immediately communicates what the tool does.

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 has no parameters, and an output schema exists (though not shown), the description is fully complete. It explains the return value (current version and latest npm version) sufficiently for an agent to understand and use the 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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. The description does not add parameter-level detail (none needed), but it provides context for what the tool returns. Following the rubric baseline of 3 for high coverage, the description adds extra context about the output, warranting a 4.

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 tool returns the current version of the Huly MCP server and the latest version on npm. The verb 'returns' and specific resource 'version of this Huly MCP server and the latest version available on npm' make the purpose unmistakable and distinguish it from sibling tools that retrieve other data.

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 the tool is for checking version info. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it vs alternatives, nor exclusions. Since it is a unique read tool with no parameters, the context is clear but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mentions.

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