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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds useful context about what content is returned. However, it does not clarify the behavior of the includeFullTranscript parameter, nor does it describe any limits or response-shaping nuances, so it provides only modest behavioral detail beyond the annotation.

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 one front-loaded sentence with a clear verb and resource, followed by a concise list of included content. There is no redundancy or filler.

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?

With no output schema and zero schema parameter coverage, the description should carry more weight. It does not explain the key optional parameter includeFullTranscript, which materially changes what is returned, leaving an agent without enough information to invoke the tool correctly in all cases.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It fails to explain includeFullTranscript entirely, and sessionId's semantics are only implicit. The listed return contents provide some context but do not clarify parameter usage or allowed values.

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 ('Returns') and resource ('one session') and enumerates the contents (UT context, notes, task measurements, linked transcript excerpts). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_transcript by making clear it returns a broader session snapshot, not just transcript data.

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 implies this tool is appropriate when a full session overview is needed, especially compared to a transcript-only tool, but it never explicitly names alternatives or states when not to use this tool. The usage context is clear enough to infer, but exclusions and sibling comparisons are absent.

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