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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It does so by detailing the return content: chronological log, timing, memory layer, session stats, top tools, and a dashboard link. There is no contradiction, and the tool's read-only nature is implied.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and quickly provides trigger phrases and output details. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Could be more concise by merging the first two lines.

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 description explains the output in detail despite no output schema. It covers parameters fully. Missing potential limitations like session boundaries or error states, but for a monitoring tool it is quite complete.

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%, but the description adds valuable context beyond schema details, such as the tool count per layer (100+ for zambo, 11 for axis) and the specific default and max for limit. This helps the agent understand the filtering options better.

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 the tool provides a live session report, listing specific outputs like tool call history, timing, and active operations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on session activity monitoring, and includes trigger phrases that indicate its usage context.

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 lists multiple trigger phrases such as '/zambo live' and 'what have you done', giving clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or offer alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous and well-defined.

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