Session status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the operation only reports status, enumerates the possible session-health outcomes, and reveals whether the server is read-only. It does not explicitly state that the call has no side effects, but 'reports' strongly implies a non-mutating check.

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, tightly worded sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Reports the health of the LinkedIn session') and includes all key return states without filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter status-check tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it defines all relevant output categories and the additional read-only signal. An agent knows what the tool returns and can interpret the result without needing further context.

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 takes zero parameters, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4. There is nothing a parameter description could add, and the description correctly focuses on behavior rather than inputs.

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 specific verb ('Reports') and an unambiguous resource ('health of the LinkedIn session'), and enumerates the exact result states: healthy, unhealthy with a reason, or no-session, plus the read-only server flag. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_me, login, or dry_run.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when not to use it, or how it relates to login or dry_run. The intended use is only implied by the name and general purpose, not stated explicitly.

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