get_current_environment

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

Annotations already establish this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive call, so the key behavioral safety is covered. The description contributes the stateful notion of a 'currently active' environment but does not add return-shape or state-source details. It is consistent with annotations and adequate for this simple getter.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and target resource. 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 parameterless getter with read-only annotations, this is nearly complete: no inputs, no side-effects, and a self-explanatory result. The only minor gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not spell out the return type/shape, but 'currently active AKHQ environment' is unambiguous enough for correct invocation.

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 takes no parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. There is nothing for the description to add about parameters; this is the 0-parameter baseline.

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 names the exact operation ('Get') and resource ('currently active AKHQ environment'). The qualifier 'currently active' distinguishes it from sibling list_environments (all environments) and set_environment (changes selection), so an agent can select it without ambiguity.

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 wording implies the tool should be used when the agent needs the active environment, and the existence of list_environments/set_environment suggests alternatives, but the description never states when to choose this tool over them or provides explicit when-not conditions. Usage is implied, not spelled out.

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