session_get_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of showing this is a read-only inspection: 'Where the session plan stands' conveys a status query rather than a mutation. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor what happens when no session exists or a handover is pending.

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 sentence phrases each piece of returned information compactly. The core meaning, 'where the session plan stands', is front-loaded.

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 getter with no output schema, the description adequately enumerates the expected return content: goal, per-step status, current step, and outstanding handover. It is not exhaustive about edge cases or relation to session_get_state, but it is sufficient for a basic call.

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, so the description does not need to detail arguments. The absence of an input schema is therefore not a 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 identifies the tool as a status read for the session plan and lists the specific data returned: goal, step statuses, current step, and human-handover flag. It distinguishes this from generic session tools by focusing on the plan's step-level state, though it uses a noun phrase rather than a verb and does not explicitly contrast with session_get_state.

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?

No guidance is given about when to call this tool versus session_get_state, session_get_activity, or sessions_list. The description implies a status-check use case but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing.

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