get_session_context

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states a read-only style operation ('Get all thoughts') and its scope ('across all trees for a specific session ID'), but it does not disclose return format, potential size, pagination, ordering, or any side effects. This is adequate but not rich.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and scope and ends with the purpose. There is no fluff or repeated schema information.

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?

The tool is low complexity—one required parameter and no nested objects—so the description covers the basic invocation need. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not specify what the returned 'thoughts' look like, how they are organized, or whether any response limits apply, leaving a moderate gap.

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%: sessionId is already described as 'The session ID to get context for'. The description adds only the word 'specific', which does not substantially increase meaning beyond the schema. The baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('all thoughts across all trees') and a clear scope ('for a specific session ID'). It also states the purpose ('to understand the full context'), making it easy to distinguish from related tree/session tools like get_tree_structure or list_trees_by_session.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_trees_by_session, get_tree, or get_tree_structure. It implies a use case ('understand the full context'), but it does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or preferred conditions.

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