td_get_capabilities

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

Annotations provide read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds no behavioral context beyond stating it detects capabilities and returns a JSON envelope. No contradiction.

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 concise sentences: first states functionality, second mentions output format. No redundant information.

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 parameters and an existing output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and output. No additional details are necessary.

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?

No parameters exist, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by stating the return format ('JSON envelope'), which is not in the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool detects MCP client capabilities, server/component versions, and runtime config. The verb 'Detect' combined with specific resources differentiates it from sibling tools like td_get_server_metrics or td_get_info.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The purpose is implied as a diagnostic capability check, but there is no differentiation from other informational tools in the sibling list.

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