session_details

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, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not confirm this is a read-only lookup, whether both alias and name must resolve to an existing session, or what happens on a missing session.

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?

A single five-word sentence is not wasteful, but it is under-specified rather than concise; there is no front-loaded distinction, scope, or outcome for the agent to act on.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but with zero schema coverage for two required parameters and no annotations, the definition leaves an agent guessing about addressing (alias vs name) and behavior. It is inadequate for a parameterized tool.

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% for both required parameters. The description mentions only 'sessione', loosely hinting at the name parameter, and says nothing about the alias parameter or the host/session addressing model, so it does not compensate for the undocumented schema.

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 verb-less noun phrase 'Dettagli di una sessione tmux' identifies the resource (a tmux session) and implies a read of its details, but 'details' is vague about what is returned or filtered. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_status, list_sessions, or session_history, which an agent would also consider for session information.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as session_history or get_status, and no prerequisites are mentioned. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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