get_current_endpoint

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states what the tool returns (endpoint name, URL, agency ID, description) and adds context about multi-user session scoping. It does not mention error cases or authentication, but for a read-only getter this is a minor gap.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose, followed by a clarifying example and a succinct return-value list. Every sentence contributes value without repetition or padding.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, output schema provided), the description is fully complete: it explains what the tool does, the session nuance, and the exact return fields. There are no complex edge cases or additional prerequisites that need explanation.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description needs no parameter explanation; it focuses entirely on return values and context, which is appropriate.

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 opens with 'Get information about the currently active SDMX data source,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It further clarifies by naming examples of organizations and explicitly distinguishes itself from tools like list_available_endpoints by focusing on the 'currently active' endpoint.

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 clear context about when to use the tool: it reports the active endpoint for the current session, especially in multi-user deployments. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when listing all endpoints would be more appropriate.

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