start_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose side effects, whether the session is persisted server-side, what happens if session_id is omitted, or whether the operation is reversible/consumable.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally clean. But the terseness comes at the cost of under-specification rather than true efficiency, so it is only adequate.

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 mutating creation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description leaves too much unspecified: no session lifecycle, no ID semantics, no relation to sibling task/agent tools.

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 the single parameter. The description says nothing about session_id — whether it is optional, auto-generated, or must be a client-chosen identifier — so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Start a new agentic session'), which is better than a tautology. However, it never clarifies what a 'session' is relative to the many session-like siblings (create_task, get_tasks, dispersl_*_agent), so an agent cannot easily distinguish it from related creation tools.

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 guidance on when to start a session, what preconditions exist, or how it relates to create_task / dispersl_*_agent alternatives. The agent must infer all of this from the name alone.

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