poll_session

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

In the absence of annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool preferentially uses WebSocket push cache for zero I/O, indicating it is a lightweight read operation. This transparency about caching and efficiency adds value beyond the basic purpose.

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?

The description is a single sentence that concisely conveys the action, resource, output, and behavioral trait. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it states what it does, what it returns (structured status report), and how it operates (caching). It could be more detailed about the report structure, but overall it is adequate.

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 input schema already provides a description for the single required parameter (session_id), and the description does not add any additional meaning or usage context for the parameter. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states that the tool polls session running status and returns a structured status report. It uses a specific verb ('poll') and identifies the resource. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'watch_session' and 'get_session_info' by focusing on polling and caching.

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 implies usage for polling session status efficiently via WebSocket cache, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'watch_session', 'get_session_info'). No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are given.

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