get_version

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the 'connected Proxmox VE' scope, clarifying that this returns the version of the currently attached environment. There is no hidden behavioral complexity to disclose for a zero-parameter getter.

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, information-dense sentence with no filler. The key action and target resource are front-loaded, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 zero-parameter, read-only, idempotent getter with an output schema, the description is fully sufficient. The annotations cover safety, the output schema covers return structure, and siblings provide enough context to avoid confusion.

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 adds meaning about what the returned version represents (the connected Proxmox VE instance) without needing parameter details.

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 a specific verb ('Get') tied to a clear resource ('connected Proxmox VE version and release'). It is immediately distinguishable from all sibling tools, which are about cluster status, resources, nodes, storage, guests, snapshots, tasks, etc.

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 gives clear context: use this tool when you need the Proxmox VE version and release of the connected environment. No exclusions or alternatives are needed because none of the sibling tools serve this purpose and there are no parameters or conditions to disambiguate.

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