get_server_version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits beyond the obvious. It only states the function but does not confirm read-only safety, possible latency, or that it requires no authentication. This is a gap for a server metadata tool.

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 with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters and good front-loading of 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?

Given no parameters and presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It states what the tool returns. However, a mention of the version format (e.g., semantic versioning) would enhance completeness.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter info. It implicitly conveys that no arguments are needed. Baseline for 0 parameters is considered as 4.

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 clearly states it returns the installed version of the mcp-spotify server, distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on Spotify content. However, it could be more specific about the format or location of the version.

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 context is clear: use this tool when you need the server version. No alternatives exist among siblings. No explicit exclusions are necessary, but a brief note on when not to use (e.g., for Spotify data) would improve guidance.

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