ksef_env_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavior beyond that: it reveals that NIP is masked, session status is included, and no login is needed. This is useful auth-context information not present in the annotations.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and appends the key usage caveat ('Nie wymaga logowania'). No filler or redundancy; every word earns its place.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only information tool, the description is complete: it states what is shown, that it is safe to call, and under what authentication condition. No output schema exists, but the three listed result items are sufficient for an agent to know what to expect.

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 input schema is empty with 100% description coverage, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. The baseline of 4 for a parameterless tool applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Pokaż' — show) and resource (current KSeF environment) plus the concrete information returned: masked NIP and session status. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling ksef_env_set, which is about changing the environment.

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 provides a clear usage context: it does not require login, so the agent knows this can be called before or without authentication. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but no sibling tool is a true alternative for this simple environment-info read.

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