List Temp Sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden, but 'List' strongly implies a read-only operation with no side effects, and 'active' usefully discloses that inactive or expired sessions are excluded from results. It says nothing about ordering, session expiry semantics, or what happens when no sessions exist, and the read-only claim is only implied rather than stated.

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?

One short sentence with no filler and the key qualifier ('active') included. It borders on under-specification rather than verbosity, which is a different problem from wasted words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the zero-parameter surface is simple. However, given a lifecycle of create_temp_nutrition_session, store_recipe_in_temp_tables, get_temp_session_recipes and cleanup_temp_sessions, the description gives no sense of where this listing fits, which is a meaningful gap for an agent orchestrating that flow.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. Schema coverage is 100% and no additional parameter meaning is needed.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and a specific resource (active temporary nutrition sessions), so the agent knows exactly what is returned. It does not differentiate itself from closely named siblings such as list_active_virtual_sessions or list_session_dri_analysis, leaving the agent to infer that 'temporary nutrition' is a distinct session type.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus the several other list_* siblings, nor any prerequisite or follow-up guidance (e.g. after create_temp_nutrition_session, before cleanup_temp_sessions). The intended workflow position is entirely implicit.

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