GitMCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Bump version number' implies a mutation operation (incrementing a version), but it doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it modifies files in-place, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., creating tags in version control), or handles errors. The description is too vague to inform the agent about how the tool behaves beyond the basic action implied by the name.

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 extremely concise with just three words, making it front-loaded and free of unnecessary information. Every word ('Bump version number') directly relates to the tool's purpose, with zero waste or redundant phrasing. This minimalism is efficient, though it may contribute to gaps in other dimensions like clarity and guidelines.

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 the complexity of a version-bumping tool (which typically involves mutation and versioning logic), the description is incomplete. No annotations are provided to clarify safety or behavior, and there's no output schema to explain return values (e.g., the new version string). The description lacks context on what the tool actually does beyond the basic action, failing to compensate for the missing structured data. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand and use the tool effectively.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for both parameters ('current' as the current version and 'level' as the bump level with a default). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain format expectations (e.g., semantic versioning), constraints, or examples. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema adequately covers parameter details without needing extra description.

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 'Bump version number' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'version_bump'. It specifies the verb 'bump' and resource 'version number', but lacks any detail about what version is being bumped (e.g., software package, project, file) or how it operates. While it distinguishes from some siblings like 'version' or 'version_validate', it doesn't clearly differentiate from potential version-related tools not present in the sibling list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context (e.g., after code changes, for releases), or compare to siblings like 'version' (which might retrieve version info) or 'version_validate' (which might check version validity). There's no explicit or implied usage scenario, leaving the agent to guess based on the name alone.

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