list-sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the return type ('Array of session objects ordered by the requested sort order'). It lacks details on side effects, permissions, error handling, or empty result behavior. The behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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 three concise sentences plus an example, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. The structure is ideal for quick comprehension.

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 3 parameters with no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should compensate but does not. It omits parameter details, output structure (e.g., fields of session objects), and sorting semantics. The example partially fills gaps but overall is incomplete.

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 0%, yet the description adds no explanation for any parameter. The example implies usage of project_identifier and limit, but does not formally describe their meaning, constraints, or interaction (e.g., ordering). No parameter semantics provided.

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 action ('List sessions for a project') and explains that sessions are 'conversation flows grouped across traces,' distinguishing from sibling tools like get-session and list-traces. It provides a concrete example to reinforce the purpose.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, such as get-session for a single session or list-traces for trace-level data. The description does not mention prerequisites, filters, or when not to use it.

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