checkpoint_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It conveys that the operation is a non-durable, session-based write, but does not detail idempotency behavior, overwrite semantics, or rate limits. The idempotencyKey parameter implies stability, but this is not described.

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 two sentences long with no extraneous words. It front-loads the action and immediately follows with usage scenario. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage context but lacks details on return values, side effects, and idempotency. It is adequate but not 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'decisions, open loops, and next actions' which map to parameters, but adds no significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It does not explain parameter relationships or required fields 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?

The description clearly states the tool stores a 'compact checkpoint of the current work state' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling memory tools by emphasizing 'without polluting durable memory' and targeting session-spanning use cases.

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 explicitly says to use this tool when a task spans windows or terminals and the session needs to recover decisions, open loops, and next actions. While it does not list alternatives or when not to use, the context is sufficiently specific to guide appropriate use.

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