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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful disclosure — "Contains no secrets" — signaling the output is safe to surface, plus the conditional behavior of reporting whether separate programs are installed.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the primary payload (name, version, data folder) and ending with the conditional check. The clause about separately-installed programs is slightly wordy but earns its place by describing a non-obvious behavior.

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-param, read-only tool with an output schema documenting the return shape and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what it returns, the conditional program check, and the reassurance that no secrets are exposed.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The enumerated output fields are not parameters and belong to the output 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?

States a specific verb ("Show") and enumerates exactly what is retrieved: server name, version, data folder, plus whether separately-installed programs are present. An agent knows precisely what this tool returns without opening the schema.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named (there are no siblings). For a zero-parameter informational tool the intended use is implied and obvious, so this is adequate but not enriched.

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