Get server version and health

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

Annotations already cover read-only and idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable context by disclosing that no token is required, and explains what a successful response means for diagnosing WOODPECKER_URL versus WOODPECKER_TOKEN issues. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 sentences carry all necessary information with no waste. The result payload is stated first, followed by the most important behavioral trait (no token required) and a compact diagnostic rule. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has no parameters and a provided output schema, so only usage context and behavioral traits need description. The description fully covers why and when to call it, including the anonymous-access detail and the diagnostic meaning of a successful response. Nothing important is missing.

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, and the schema confirms that. No parameter explanation is needed, and the description appropriately focuses on the response and usage rather than inventing unnecessary parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb ('Returns') and precise resource ('Woodpecker version and whether the server reports itself healthy'). It clearly distinguishes this from the many sibling tools by naming exactly what information it provides.

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?

It explicitly identifies when to use this tool: 'Works without a token, which makes it the call to use when nothing else does.' It also explains the diagnostic interpretation of the result, giving an agent actionable guidance for choosing this tool in a troubleshooting workflow.

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