da_config_active

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context that the config is current and merged, but it does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, whether permissions are needed, or what happens if the config is unavailable. A single noun phrase is not enough for full transparency.

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?

The description is only four words and every word carries meaning. It is front-loaded and free of filler, appropriate for a zero-parameter read tool.

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 that there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is sufficient for correct invocation of a simple config-read endpoint. It leaves some broader context about how it relates to default and local config variants unspecified, but that is a minor gap.

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 is empty with 100% coverage, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify.

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?

Identifies the specific resource (directadmin.conf) and the merged/current variant, which distinguishes it from da_config_default and da_config_local siblings. The description lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'read,' but the tool name and phrase 'Currently applied' make the intent clear.

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 is given about when to choose this tool versus da_config_default or da_config_local. However, 'Currently applied' and '(merged)' imply this shows the effective configuration, so usage is conveyed indirectly rather than stated.

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