get_version

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it queries npm for the latest version, which implies an external network call—a useful behavioral detail not captured in the annotations. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 front-loads the action ('Returns the current version') and the specific details. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary filler.

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?

The tool is extremely simple with no parameters and a provided output schema, so the description fully covers the tool's purpose and behavior. The mention of npm as the source for the latest version adds necessary context beyond the schema.

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 the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but none is needed since the input schema is empty and the function is self-contained.

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, using the specific verb 'returns' with a concrete resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which are version-related.

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 usage: use this tool when you need version information. It clearly states what it does but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. Given the tool's simplicity and lack of competing tools, the context is clear enough to warrant a 4.

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