audit_session

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or potential side effects. The description only states the function, leaving the agent to infer that it is a query operation.

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, complete sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words or repetition. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple input schema (one parameter, no nested objects) and absence of output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what the report includes. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's role among many siblings.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema's statement that the session ID can be a prefix. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Generate an audit report' and identifies the resource 'session' with clear scope: 'all files read/written, commands executed, MCP tools used, and URLs fetched'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'recover_session' or 'list_sessions'.

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 purpose implies usage for auditing a session, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'check_alerts', 'estimate_context_size'). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are provided.

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