Antigravity MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

version

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Antigravity MCP Server version and system information to verify client compatibility and troubleshoot environment issues.

Instructions

Display version and system information

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "version"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agyCli`	No
`nodeJs`	Yes
`platform`	Yes
`mcpServer`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and repeatability profile is covered. The description adds only that system-level information is included beyond the version string; it says nothing about cost, environment sensitivity, or whether the system info is host-specific.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with no filler, front-loading the primary output (version) before the secondary one (system information). Nothing could be removed without losing content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-argument, read-only informational tool with an output schema that documents the return shape, the description plus annotations cover everything an agent needs. The only minor softness is the vagueness of "system information," which the output schema resolves.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to supply; the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description misleads about inputs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Display version and system information" gives a specific verb (display) plus the resources returned (version, system info), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like health, ping, or metrics, which likely return overlapping diagnostic data.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative is named. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the word "version" — an agent can infer it is for checking build/version, but nothing steers it away from health or ping for diagnostics.

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

Deploy Server