Get Version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the action as retrieving version information, which implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't explicitly state whether it returns the version as a string, requires a running Metasploit instance, or has any side effects. For a simple informational tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 with no extraneous information. Exactly as concise as needed for a simple zero-parameter getter.

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 simplicity (zero params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete for an agent to know what the tool does. However, it lacks context about the return format or any prerequisites (e.g., requires Metasploit to be installed/running), which could matter for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuously, since there are no properties). The description adds no parameter details because there are none to add. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description doesn't introduce confusion.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('Metasploit version information'), using a specific verb and object. It is distinguishable from siblings like execute-command or run-vuln-scan, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from potential version-related tools.

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 a simple use case: retrieving version info. However, it does not state when to use this over alternatives or any context like 'call before other operations to verify environment' – but for a zero-parameter read-only informational tool, the implied usage is fairly obvious.

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