get_active_tools

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

No annotations exist, so behavioral disclosure falls entirely on the description. The word 'Show' communicates read-only introspection, and the description explicitly reveals that the tool returns session state, a count of exposed tools, and an estimated token cost. It does not explicitly say it has no side effects, but the verb and zero-parameter design make that clear enough.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads exactly what the tool reports, and the second sentence explains why the agent would call it. 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, no-output-schema tool, this description is fully adequate. It conveys the tool's scope, output, and a motivating use case. Nothing essential is missing for a model to invoke the tool appropriately.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the schema is already complete and the description has no parameter details to add. The description does contribute some useful semantics by clarifying what the response will contain, namely active categories, count of exposed tools, and token cost.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Show', and names a clear resource: the tool categories that are currently active in this session, plus a count and estimated token cost. The phrase 'currently active' and the context-budget emphasis clearly set it apart from sibling tools like list_tool_categories or search_tools.

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 directly tells the agent when to use the tool: 'Use this to understand your current context budget.' It clearly establishes a use case, though it does not explicitly mention exclusions alternatives such as when the agent should use list_tool_categories instead.

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