import_session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: the input is validated, and in case of ID collision, a fresh ID and save path are assigned automatically without overwriting. It does not detail all possible side effects or prerequisites (e.g., session state), but the collision handling is a critical behavioral trait well explained.

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 a concise 4-sentence paragraph. The first sentence immediately states the purpose and expected input. Every sentence adds value: validation, collision handling. No extraneous 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 only one parameter, no annotations, and a mention of an output schema (not shown), the description provides sufficient context. It explains what the tool does, how the input relates to export_session, and the collision behavior. An agent can confidently select and invoke this tool based on this description.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining the 'data' parameter as a 'previous export_session payload' and specifying it can be a dict or JSON string, adding meaning far beyond the schema's type constraints. This clearly tells the agent what to provide.

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 explicitly states the tool 'recreates a session from a previous export_session payload', clearly specifying the verb and resource. It differentiates this tool from siblings like start_session by focusing on importing an exported session, not creating a new one. The mention of 'collision-safe import' adds further specificity.

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 when to use the tool: after an export_session generates a payload. It notes validation and collision handling, providing context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, though the sibling list shows start_session for new sessions, which is implicit.

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