ksef_token_get

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

Annotations only mark readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it requires an active session and explicitly states that it returns metadata and never the token value. This is valuable because it prevents misuse of a token-related tool.

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?

Two short sentences, each earning its place: the operation, the prerequisite, and the critical return-value distinction. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool, the description covers the essential invocation context: active session, output behavior, and safety guarantee. There is no output schema, but 'returns metadata' gives a useful expectation; specific returned fields would improve completeness but aren't required to call it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: the only parameter, referenceNumber, is already documented as 'Numer referencyjny tokena'. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter's format, source, or relationship to other token endpoints, so it stays at the baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

Description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Pobierz szczegóły tokena KSeF' — clearly a fetch-details operation. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like ksef_token_list or ksef_token_generate, so the distinction is mostly carried by the name and the word 'details'.

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?

Provides a useful prerequisite: 'Wymaga aktywnej sesji'. However, it does not say when to prefer this over ksef_token_list, ksef_token_generate, or ksef_token_revoke, and it gives no exclusion cases. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly explained.

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