never4ga_context_startup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the key side effect and return value ("Opens a session and returns its id"), but says nothing about persistence, auth requirements, or whether repeated calls create multiple sessions.

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 tight sentences with the action front-loaded and zero padding. The clause "what it is, what binds it, what the last session did" is slightly abstract but does convey payload content efficiently.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should say more about the shape of the returned context and the effect of creating a session. It covers the essentials for calling the tool but leaves the return contract vague.

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%, so cwd, task, and client are already well documented, including the useful 'never pass a whole prompt' warning. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that baseline.

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 names a concrete verb and resource: it opens a session and returns its id, and it characterizes the payload as minimal startup context. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely-named sibling never4ga_context_focus, so an agent must infer the split.

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?

"For starting a session in a workspace" implies the trigger condition, but no alternative is named and no exclusion is stated (e.g., when to use context_focus or workspace_resolve instead). Usage is only implied.

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