session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The description adds one key behavioral detail: 'stop' removes the sharing indicator, and 'resume' requires explicit user consent. However, it doesn't disclose other behaviors like what 'status' returns or the effects of 'resume' on the session. It lacks depth but does add value beyond the schema.

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 short and to the point. It front-loads the main purpose and provides a parenthetical clarification. No 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (single enum parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the important caveat about 'resume' but misses defining what 'status' returns and what 'resume' actually does beyond the consent requirement. It is adequate but leaves some gaps for an agent to reason about.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes each action with a brief note. The description repeats the 'resume' condition and adds the 'removes the sharing indicator' detail for 'stop'. This adds marginal value beyond the schema, so a baseline 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 states the general purpose ('inspect or end the control session') but is somewhat vague on what 'inspect' means. It doesn't explicitly name the resources or actions beyond the schema's enum. It mentions 'end' but the schema also includes 'resume', so the description partially covers the actions. It is not a tautology, but it is not fully specific.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance. It does clarify 'resume' is only after user agreement, which is helpful, but it doesn't contrast with sibling tools or explain when to use 'status' vs 'stop' etc. The absence of alternatives or exclusions leaves the agent to infer usage.

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