memory_version

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states it retrieves version without disclosing any behavioral traits like side effects, authentication needs, or response format. Minimal disclosure for a read-only operation.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose. Appropriately front-loaded for quick understanding.

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 existence of an output schema, the description is largely sufficient for a simple version tool. Could optionally specify format or examples to reach full 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?

Input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so description correctly adds no parameter details. Baseline score of 4 per calibration guidelines for zero-parameter tools.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'version of the Memory MCP server and configuration', making purpose unambiguous. Easily distinguished from siblings like memory_model_info which focuses on model 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the tool is self-explanatory for version retrieval, and sibling tools have distinct purposes, so implicit usage is adequate.

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