get_godot_versionCheck which Godot executable the server uses by showing its path, version, and discovery method, plus any other Godot installs found.
Show which Godot executable this server uses (path, version, how it was found) and any other Godot installs it found.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by disclosing what information is surfaced (path, version, discovery method, other installs), which matters since there is no output schema to convey returns.
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 front-loaded sentence that states the primary purpose first and the supplementary detail ('any other Godot installs') second. No filler or 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?
For a zero-param, read-only diagnostic with annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything needed: what the tool does and what it returns. With no output schema, the enumeration of returned fields closes the gap fully.
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 takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and the empty schema leaves no ambiguity to resolve.
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 and resource ('Show which Godot executable this server uses') and enumerates the exact facts returned (path, version, how it was found, other installs). This is clearly distinct from all siblings, which deal with projects, scenes, and nodes rather than installation diagnostics.
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 implies the tool is used to inspect the server's Godot installation, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance and names no alternatives or conditions. For a zero-param diagnostic tool the implied usage is reasonably legible, but nothing is stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.