Simplify get_display_name logic.

[ege-arhan]

Problem
get_display_name duplicated title-first precedence across Tool and non-Tool branches (title > name vs title > annotations.title > name). Only Tool.annotations.title needs a special middle branch.

Solution
Hoist the shared title check before the Tool branch. Keep the Tool.annotations.title fallback as the only type-specific branch. Fall through to name. No behavioral change.

Impact
Less branching, single title precedence path, easier to maintain. No API change.

Evidence

• python -m py_compile src/mcp/shared/metadata_utils.py -> ok
• ruff check src/mcp/shared/metadata_utils.py -> All checks passed
• Manual assertions for Tool/Resource/Prompt title/annotation/name precedence verified (title > annotations.title > name).

Fixes #3480

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.
To continue using code reviews, you can upgrade your account or add credits to your account and enable them for code reviews in your settings.

[github-actions]

This PR has been closed automatically. This repo only keeps pull requests open when they come from a maintainer, or from a contributor a maintainer has assigned to the linked issue, and you aren't currently assigned to #3480.

If a maintainer assigns you to #3480, this PR reopens on its own and there's nothing more you need to do here. Assignment is a maintainer call based on capacity; comments that only ask to be assigned don't factor in. What does help is engaging on the issue itself by confirming the repro, explaining why it matters for your use case, or describing the approach you'd take.

You're welcome to keep pushing commits here (just avoid force-pushing, since GitHub can't reopen a rewritten branch), but that on its own won't get the PR reviewed or the issue assigned, and realistically most auto-closed PRs stay closed. There's no need to open a new PR either way.

CONTRIBUTING.md has the full reasoning, but in short:

• We're a small team with very little capacity to review community PRs right now.
• Many recent PRs are AI-generated with little human review, and reviewing one carefully still costs a maintainer as much time as it ever did. A well-described issue is usually more useful to us than the code.

Maintainers: reopen, remove missing-issue-link, or add bypass-issue-check to override.