Drill into a single session by ID. Returns the session header plus every tool call within it (capped at 500 to bound payload size).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes | Session ID from list_recent_sessions. Must belong to the caller's organization. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| model | Yes | ||
| startedAt | Yes | ||
| toolCalls | Yes | ||
| totalCostUsd | Yes | ||
| toolCallCount | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds behavioral context: returns header + tool calls, capped at 500. No contradiction.
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, zero waste, front-loaded with action verb. Every sentence adds necessary information.
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?
Given 1 parameter, no nested objects, and existing output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns and its limits.
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 has 100% coverage with description. Description adds extra context: 'Must belong to the caller's organization.' Adds value beyond schema.
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?
Clearly states it drills into a single session by ID, returns header and tool calls (capped at 500). Distinguishes from sibling list_recent_sessions which lists 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?
Implicitly guides to use when needing session details. Mentions payload cap (500) as a usage constraint. Does not explicitly exclude other tools but context makes it clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: cost estimation, session details, daily cost, monthly usage, session listing, top tools, and demo. No two tools overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., estimate_cost, get_session_details, list_top_tools). 'try_demo' also fits the pattern.
Seven tools is an appropriate number for a cost monitoring server, covering estimation, session details, daily/monthly usage, and top tools without being overwhelming.
The tool set covers core cost monitoring needs: estimation, session drill-down, daily/monthly totals, and top tools. Minor gaps like historical trends or budget management are missing but not critical for the stated purpose.