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

Annotations already declare non-destructive and open-world, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: named speakers appear in the Speaker Center, the session appears in the app agenda immediately, it 'reaches no one directly,' it is reversible via update_session or delete, and it requires a Cotlet API key with access to the app. That is precisely the side-effect and auth disclosure a create tool needs.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, and most sentences carry distinct information (immediacy, reach, reversibility, auth). The first two sentences partly overlap ('Add a session to the agenda' / 'Creates one session in the agenda of one event'), which is minor redundancy.

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?

For a single-session create with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the missing burden: side effects, reversibility, immediate visibility, and auth requirements. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is absent.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning for the speakers parameter by stating that named speakers also appear in the Speaker Center. It does not extend the other parameters (tracks, start/end semantics) beyond the 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?

States a specific verb (add) and resource (a session to the agenda in Session Manager), and scopes it to 'one session in the agenda of one event.' An agent can distinguish it from the sibling whova_update_session and whova_list_sessions without opening a 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?

The description names the alternative (update_session) and a delete as the way to undo it, and explicitly says it 'runs without asking,' which tells the agent it is safe to invoke without confirmation. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-use clause, so it is strong context rather than full routing.

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