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

Goes well beyond annotations by explaining the soft-delete behavior, dry-run default, return value for dry runs, and that confirm:true is required for actual deletion. The destructiveHint is consistent because the operation removes sessions from the account, even though user disk files are untouched.

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 appropriately front-loaded with the action and safety model. It is longer than typical but every sentence supports correct, safe invocation for a destructive bulk operation.

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?

Covers the critical context for a destructive tool: dry-run behavior, return shape for dry runs, filter composition, and confirmation workflow. It does not describe the success response after actual deletion, but annotations and the 100%-covered schema reduce that gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameter descriptions already do most of the work. The tool description adds useful semantics: ids come from doseedo_list_sessions, filters combine with AND, and confirm:true triggers actual deletion only after a dry run.

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 ('Delete DAW sessions in bulk') and immediately clarifies the soft-delete scope and that disk files are untouched. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_session or list_sessions.

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?

Explicitly describes selection modes (ids or filters) and mandates the dry-run-first workflow. It tells the agent exactly when to proceed with confirm:true and includes a clear safety rule: 'Never delete sessions the user did not ask to remove.'

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