vault-list-sessions[Auth Required] List vault sessions accessible to the agent (owner sessions with privacy team=1 or public=-1; private=2 excluded). Paginated, newest-first by default.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number | |
| label | No | Filter by label (partial match) | |
| sortBy | No | Sort by: created_at, updated_at, label, last_browser | updated_at |
| per_page | No | Results per page | |
| descending | No | Descending order |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses several important traits: authentication is required, results are paginated, ordering defaults to newest-first, and private sessions are excluded. It does not state that the operation is read-only or describe rate limits, but it provides solid operational context for a listing tool.
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 a single tight sentence preceded by an authentication marker, with the core action and scoping rules front-loaded. Every phrase earns its place, and there is no redundant filler.
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 listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential operational context: auth, filtering scope, pagination, and default sort order. It could say more about the shape of returned session objects, but it is otherwise complete for correct invocation.
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 input schema already documents all five parameters. The description reinforces pagination and the default newest-first ordering, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline of 3 appropriate.
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 states a specific verb and resource ('List vault sessions') and immediately scopes it to sessions accessible to the agent, with explicit inclusion/exclusion rules for privacy team=1, public=-1, and private=2. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vault-get-session or vault-create-session without needing to open their schemas.
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 explains the accessibility scope and privacy filtering, implying when the tool applies, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vault-get-session or vault-get-revisions. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.
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.