get_recent_sessions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get' and 'Returns List', implying read-only but not confirming. It omits details about ordering, inclusivity of the days parameter, timezone handling, or any potential side effects.

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 exceptionally concise, leading with the main purpose, followed by separate Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is necessary and contributes to understanding, with no redundancy or 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers the core purpose and parameter. However, it lacks behavioral details such as ordering, edge cases, and what constitutes a 'recent history session'. It is adequate but minimal, especially given the presence of overlapping sibling tools.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description includes 'Args: days - Number of days to look back (default: 30)', which adds essential meaning beyond the schema's bare type and default. It explains what the parameter represents, though it doesn't specify constraints like minimum value.

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 'Get recent DJ history sessions within the specified number of days', providing a specific verb, resource, and temporal scope. It distinguishes from broader history tools by emphasizing 'recent' and 'days', but does not explicitly reference sibling tools like get_history_sessions.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_history_sessions or search_history_sessions. The description only explains what it does, not when it should be preferred or avoided.

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