antigravity_sessions

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses performance ('fast, zero model cost') and data source ('local database'), and the verb 'list or search' implies read-only behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly confirm that no modifications occur, nor does it mention potential errors or limitations. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and value proposition, followed by the return fields and usage hint. Zero waste, all sentences earn their place.

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 straightforward list/search tool, the description covers purpose, returns, and usage context. The limit parameter is in the schema, so pagination is handled. No output schema exists, but the listed return fields suffice. Missing only minor details like error handling or sort order, which are not critical for correct invocation.

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 100% and both parameters are well-described in the schema (limit with default, query for filtering titles/summaries). The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond restating the search capability. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles parameter documentation.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('List or search'), resource ('historical Antigravity sessions'), and key differentiators ('local database, fast, zero model cost'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like run_antigravity or antigravity_start, which execute sessions, by focusing on historical lookup.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use this to find a conversation ID to resume', which is clear usage guidance. It doesn't enumerate alternatives, but the context makes it obvious that this is for retrieval, not execution. Could be stronger by mentioning when not to use, but the sentence provides actionable direction.

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