get_server_info

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'Get' strongly implies a read-only operation, and the enumerated output fields leave little ambiguity about what the tool does. For a parameterless info getter, no destructive or complex side effects are suggested.

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 sentence, front-loads the action and resource, and uses only necessary words. Every word contributes meaning: 'Get', 'revealjs-mcp server info', and the three specific data fields.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects, an output schema exists), the description is fully complete. It specifies exactly what information the agent will receive—version, base URL, and data directory—so no further context is needed.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description compensates for the absence of parameters by explaining what data the tool returns, providing all the context an agent needs.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource, 'revealjs-mcp server info', and enumerates the exact data returned: reveal.js version, base URL, and data directory. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that list themes, transitions, or presentations.

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 clearly implies this tool should be used when the agent needs server-level metadata such as the reveal.js version or base URL. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the resource scope makes it obvious that this is the dedicated information tool, and no competing sibling serves the same purpose.

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