session_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses critical behaviors: signed-out sessions cause other tools to raise (rather than silently return empty results), and backup_available=true may cause automatic recovery on the next call. It also notes that operator settings are immutable by any 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 compact and front-loaded with the most important instruction ('Start here'). Each sentence adds distinct value: purpose, flag semantics, error behavior, and recovery steps. No filler or 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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown but signaled) and zero input parameters, the description covers all necessary context: what the flags mean, what happens when signed out, and how to recover. It fully equips the agent to interpret results and take appropriate next actions.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description correctly omits parameter details. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and nothing further is needed. The description instead focuses on output semantics, which is 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 clearly states that the tool reports session status and server permissions, and it explains the two key flags (writes_enabled, orders_enabled) and their scope. It also positions itself as the entry point ('Start here'), which distinguishes it from all sibling tools that operate on specific resources.

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?

It explicitly says 'Start here', establishing it as the first tool to call. It also provides clear conditional guidance: when signed_in is false, other tools will raise, and recovery is start_login() + submit_login_code(). This gives the agent a decision path and alternatives.

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