List Lucky web-terminal connections and sessions

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

Annotations already mark the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: passwords and private keys are redacted, and SFTP file operations are not exposed, which prevents an agent from expecting secret material or file-transfer capabilities.

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?

Two short sentences deliver two distinct, useful caveats with no filler. The wording is front-loaded and easy to parse, and each sentence earns its place.

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 enumeration tool, the title plus description sufficiently convey purpose and key behavioral limitations. There is no output schema, so a bit more detail about the returned items could help, but the simplicity of the operation and the strong annotations make the current definition adequate.

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, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The schema fully covers the empty input shape, and the baseline for a parameterless tool applies.

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 does not restate the verb, but the title and name clearly identify a read-only listing of web-terminal connections and sessions. The caveat about redacted passwords and private keys reinforces the read-only nature and distinguishes this resource from other lucky_* list tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the title and name: call it to enumerate web-terminal connections/sessions. There is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over sibling tools such as lucky_upsert_terminal_connection, and no exclusion statements beyond the SFTP note.

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