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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and an output schema exists, so the safety and return-format burden is light. The description still adds useful traits: newest-first ordering and the presence of total volume. Pagination behavior around the limit parameter is not disclosed.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and no filler. The second sentence is dense with cross-reference detail but still earns its place by preventing a wrong-tool selection.

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?

The list semantics, ordering, date-range optionality, and the routing to get_coaching_context cover what an agent needs, and the output schema handles return values. The limit/pagination gap is the one meaningful omission.

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% across all three parameters, so the description carries the full load. It only gestures at 'optional date range' without date format or inclusive/exclusive semantics, and the limit parameter (default 50) is never mentioned at all.

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?

States a specific verb and resource, plus ordering ('newest first') and returned content ('summary fields and total volume'). It also names the sibling that covers a related but different job (get_coaching_context for training review), so an agent can place it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear context (session history with optional date range) and explicitly routes the training-review use case to get_coaching_context with its task argument. It does not, however, state when to reach for this versus get_session (single session) or get_stats.

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