erinys_session_endEnds an active session and optionally records a summary, letting AI agents close a run and preserve final context.
End a session with optional summary.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| summary | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. "End" implies a mutation, but the description never says whether session data is destroyed, whether ending is reversible, whether an in-progress state is flushed, or what preconditions exist. An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, but mutation semantics remain undisclosed.
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 one-sentence description is front-loaded and free of padding, so nothing is wasted. The terseness crosses into under-specification rather than efficiency.
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 mutating lifecycle tool with zero annotation coverage, zero schema descriptions, and a large, overlapping sibling set — the description supplies almost none of the context needed to invoke it confidently. The presence of an output schema removes only the need to describe return values.
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% for both parameters. The single word "optional" hints at the default for summary, which is already visible in the schema, while the required `id` is never characterized (session identifier? title? prefix?) and the summary's purpose (persisted for later recall?) is left entirely implicit.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("End a session") that an agent can act on immediately. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like erinys_session_summary or erinys_session_start, so the agent must guess which session-terminating or session-inspecting tool fits.
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 end a session versus calling erinys_session_summary first, nor any prerequisite (must the session be active? does it need to be the current session?). With 29 sibling tools, the absence of any routing hint is a real gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.