list_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions sessions are discovered on the machine and live ones are in tmux panes, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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. The first sentence states the purpose clearly, and the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence is meaningful and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool has 3 parameters with no output schema. The description explains the purpose and basic usage of scope and project, but does not mention the limit parameter or what the output format contains. For a simple list tool, it provides core context but lacks details about output and all parameters.

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 covers 67% of parameters with descriptions (scope and project), but limit lacks description. The description adds context beyond the schema: explaining how to use scope='live' and project filter. It does not mention the limit parameter. Overall, it adds value but does not fully compensate for missing schema coverage.

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 lists Claude Code sessions, distinguishing between recent and live ones. It is specific about the resource (sessions) and action (list), and the sibling tools are all different types (chat-related), so no confusion.

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 provides usage guidance: 'Use scope='live' to see only sessions you can reach right now, or pass a project filter.' This tells when to use specific parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives among siblings, which are unrelated anyway.

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