anylogic_version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the returned metadata fields, implying a safe read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state side effects, auth needs, or freshness guarantees. The output schema covers return shape, which lowers the bar.

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 compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the key returned values and is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter metadata tool.

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 simple zero-parameter metadata tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete because it identifies the returned metadata. The only small gap is the lack of explicit usage context relative to sibling tools.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4, and the description adds no parameter-related confusion.

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 names three specific metadata outputs: corpus version, document count, and build date. The resource is clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as anylogic_search or anylogic_toc.

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 only lists returned fields and gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent must infer that this is a corpus metadata lookup rather than a content retrieval or search operation.

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