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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool requires a specific payload (full session editor payload) and mandates access checks, but does not detail side effects or failure modes. It provides useful context beyond annotations.

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 three sentences and mostly front-loaded with the core action. The first sentence includes jargon ('LPBE') which slightly reduces clarity, but overall it is concise and well-structured.

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 the tool's complexity (34 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description focuses heavily on usage guidelines but neglects parameter semantics. It does not describe return values or payload structure, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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. However, it offers no explanation of the 34 parameters, their meaning, or how to construct the payload. The agent must rely solely on property names and types, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 clearly states it updates a one-on-one session, which distinguishes it from create_session and delete_session. However, the phrase 'full LPBE session editor payload' uses an internal acronym that may not be immediately clear to an AI agent.

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 provides explicit preconditions: check business permissions, FREE businesses cannot use, call check_business_tool_access, show grace-period warning and resubscribe link, and never proceed when blocked. This is comprehensive and directly guides the agent on when and how to use the tool.

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