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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety profile is clear. The description adds the specific content (platform and adapter versions) beyond annotations, offering context about what the tool reports.

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, clear sentence that fully expresses the tool's function without fluff. Front-loaded with the action verb 'Show', no wasted words.

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 the tool has zero parameters accentric, simple purpose, and annotations cover safety, the description is adequately complete. No output schema is present, but for a trivial version info tool, not needed. It clearly states what information is returned.

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 0 parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. Per the rubric, a 0-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4. No additional parameter semantics required.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('current MCP platform and adapter versions'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'toolkit_info' or 'connect'. It immediately conveys the tool's exact purpose.

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 when to use this tool (when needing version information) and its simple scope. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but given the tool's simplicity and zero parameters, this is sufficient.

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