generate_session_migration_plan

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 only restates the planning purpose and does not state whether the tool executes changes, has side effects, requires specific registry state, or returns a plan document. This leaves the behavioral profile almost entirely undisclosed.

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 terse sentence with no filler, which is efficient. However, it is under-specified for a tool with seven parameters and no other documentation, making it more sparse than appropriately 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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description does not explain any required input semantics, usage conditions, or behavioral constraints. With four required parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no annotations, the agent lacks enough context to invoke the tool reliably without additional outside knowledge.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the seven parameters, including required ones like source, target, application, and session_run_dir. The phrase 'session overlay' only loosely maps to session_run_dir and offers no actual parameter semantics.

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 identifies a specific action ('Plan a migration') and a distinctive scope ('canonical registry plus one run's session overlay'), which differentiates it from the sibling generate_migration_plan. It is not fully self-contained because 'canonical registry' and 'session overlay' rely on domain knowledge, but the core purpose is understandable.

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 no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as generate_migration_plan. The phrase 'plus one run's session overlay' hints at a specific use case, but the agent is left to infer when this tool should be selected over others.

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