Session

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden and delivers nothing: it does not disclose that mark_complete/complete_session/enforce_compliance are mutating operations, that 'force' bypasses guards, or what enforcement does to a session. The only behavioral hint ('enforcement') is a bare keyword.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but it is an under-specified fragment rather than a concise sentence; a handful of words are spent on domain nouns ('compliance', 'enforcement') that convey no actionable meaning. Compact, but not efficient in the sense of conveying information per word.

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?

A 7-parameter tool with 6 actions, mutation paths, a guard-bypass flag, and no output schema or annotations demands far more than one dash-separated phrase. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly (action selection, session_id defaulting, force semantics) is present.

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 only 57% (evidence is entirely untyped/undescribed, action has a 6-value enum with no descriptions, enforcement_action unexplained), and the description contributes zero parameter information. It fails to compensate for the coverage gap in exactly the cases where it is needed.

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?

A noun-phrase label ('Unified M7 session management - status, compliance, completion, enforcement') that restates the tool's name and titles its domains, but never states a verb or what calling it actually does. An agent cannot distinguish it from siblings like mcp_m7_cross_session or mcp_m7_cycle based on this text.

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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, no exclusions. With 6 enum actions spanning status reads and session completion, the description gives the agent nothing to decide which action to pick or when this tool is preferable to mcp_m7_cross_session.

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