end_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions mutation (updates memory, stores digest) but does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or what happens to the session. The pipeline reference is not explained.

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 concise sentence, front-loading the main action. However, it lacks structure such as bullet points or separate sections that could aid readability.

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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits details about the pipeline, digest format, memory updates, and behavior for different outcomes and exit_code. The tool's effects are not fully contextualized.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters. It does not explain what 'outcome' values entail, what 'exit_code' represents, or how 'session_id' and 'project_id' are used beyond schema types.

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 the tool signals session end and runs a pipeline, stores digest, and updates memory. It distinguishes from siblings like get_project_memory (read) or list_sessions (list), but the 'Layer 1→2→3 pipeline' is somewhat vague.

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 usage guidance or alternatives are given. It is implied that this tool is used when ending a session, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, nor any mention of prerequisites or context.

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