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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the auth requirement (auth.userToken forwarded as a Bearer token), the enableSelfService prerequisite, the fact that payloads are only included for active sessions, and pageSize clamping. This is strong, though it omits error behavior and response shape details.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then the self-service requirement, key behavioral quirk, and pagination/sort notes. Nearly every sentence earns its place, though the explicit 'Source:' line and trailing config-preference sentence are somewhat tangential.

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 five-parameter self-service list endpoint with no output schema, the description covers the critical prerequisite, auth flow, payload filtering behavior, and pageSize limit. It is enough for an agent to select and call the tool correctly, though an explicit note about the response shape or how to page through results would make it fully 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?

The input schema already documents q, app_id, status, pageSize, auth, and connection parameters, so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds useful context by tying sort keys to the admin session list and recommending stable connection config. However, it leaves page and dir semantics to the schema and does not compensate for all undocumented parameters.

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 opens with 'Returns a page of sessions for the current user within the current workspace,' which is a specific verb+resource statement that clearly identifies this as the self-service 'my sessions' endpoint. It also names the canonical HTTP source. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling admin-level get_sessions tool, so it is not a 5.

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 gives clear context: it is a self-service dashboard endpoint, it requires workspace enableSelfService: true, and it advises preferring connection.workspaceName and connection.appId as stable config. It does not explicitly say when to avoid this tool or name get_sessions as the admin alternative, so it stops short of full guidance.

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