Get MCP Server Version

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds lifecycle context the annotations cannot: the tool is deprecated and will disappear in 2.0.0. It doesn't describe the return shape, but that is minor for a zero-param getter.

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?

Two short sentences, with the deprecation warning front-loaded ahead of the functional description — the right ordering for a tool an agent should avoid. No 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?

For a no-parameter, no-output-schema version getter, the description covers purpose, migration path and lifetime. The only gap is the concrete return type/format (string vs object), which nothing else in the definition supplies.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids wasting words on a schema that is 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 and resource: returns the version of this mantisbt-mcp-server instance, which scopes it away from get_mantis_version (the MantisBT application version). It does not fully explain how it differs from its named successor get_version, but the deprecation framing makes the relationship clear enough.

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?

Explicitly says when NOT to use it ("Deprecated: use get_version instead"), names the alternative, and gives a removal timeline (2.0.0). This is exactly the when/when-not/alternative guidance the dimension rewards.

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