Show current session settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait ('in-memory' and 'no config file'), which helps the agent understand persistence. However, it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, what the return value looks like, or any error conditions.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the main purpose and then add a crucial caveat about persistence. No redundant wording; every word adds value.

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 simple getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the in-memory nature and lists the contained settings. It could have briefly mentioned the output format (e.g., a summary or mapping), but the tool's simplicity makes this acceptable.

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 the description needs to explain no inputs. The description correctly focuses on what the tool outputs rather than inputs, matching the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 uses a clear verb ('Show') and a specific resource ('in-memory session settings') and enumerates the contained items (umodel exe, game directory, output directory, AES keys). This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like umodel_session_set or umodel_game_list.

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 implies its use for inspecting current session state without persistence, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or mention the counterpart umodel_session_set. It provides context but relies on inference.

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