jms_list_terminal_sessions

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

The description adds important scope information by noting 'in the current MCP server process', which is a behavioral constraint not otherwise disclosed. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden, and the verb 'List' implies a read-only operation. This is sufficient for a simple list 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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It immediately states the action and resource, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It specifies purpose and scope, and the output schema handles return value documentation. No additional behavioral context is needed for this simple operation.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty object). The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter-specific information, which is appropriate given there are none.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly defines the resource ('active managed KoKo terminal sessions') with a scope qualifier ('in the current MCP server process'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like jms_list_sftp_sessions by specifying terminal sessions and the managed KoKo context.

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 clearly indicates the tool's context (active sessions in the current process) without explicit exclusions or alternatives. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the 'list' verb and scope make it obvious when to use it, qualifying as clear context with no exclusions.

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