get_version_info

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

Discloses the returned fields (service_name, service_version, spec_version) and the purpose of each. No annotations exist, but the description fully covers behavior and side effects (none).

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?

Succinct with a clear structure: first line states purpose, second explains usage context, third lists return fields. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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?

Completely describes the tool's function, usage, and output. With no parameters and an output schema (implied), no additional information 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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by detailing the return fields and their significance, justifying a 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?

Explicitly states it retrieves version information for the qrz-mcp service and the upstream QRZ API. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (data lookup, logbook operations) by focusing on version alignment.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use to confirm fleet alignment and detect drift across MCP deployments. Implicitly indicates not for data retrieval, differentiating from sibling tools.

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