get_session_decisions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that decisions are summary-only and can be edited/removed before persistence. Implies read-only operation (get), but could be more explicit about side-effects (none).

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?

Very concise: one sentence for purpose, one for usage context, then bullet-like return format. Every sentence adds value. No fluff.

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?

With no output schema, description fully specifies return fields (intentId, decisions summary, count). Points to get_decision_detail for full details. Adequate for the tool's complexity, though decisions array structure could be described slightly more.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add meaning beyond the input schema for parameters; focuses on output structure and relationships to other tools. No extra parameter guidance provided.

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?

Clearly states 'Get all decisions recorded in the current session for an intent.' Distinguishes from siblings like get_project_decisions (broader scope) and get_decision_detail (single decision details) by specifying session and summary nature.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this before committing to review what decisions were captured during development.' This gives clear context. Could further contrast with alternatives like get_project_decisions or log_work, but current guidance is sufficient.

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