Manage OpenCode sessions

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveness (destructiveHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds that active and child sessions are protected, which is useful safety context. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like authorization requirements, rate limits, or what happens to related data. Score 3 acknowledges the added value without being comprehensive.

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 two sentences: the first lists the actions concisely, the second adds a key constraint. Every word earns its place, and the most important information (what the tool does) is front-loaded. There is no redundancy or verbosity.

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 the tool has 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, multiple actions, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the role of permission-related parameters, how actions are selected, or the expected return values. An agent would struggle to use all functionality correctly without additional context.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the action types ('list', 'cancel', etc.) but does not explain the meaning of 'sessionId', 'permissionId', or 'permissionResponse' parameters beyond what the enum values suggest. The mapping from actions to required parameters is missing, making it hard for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 lists the actions (list, cancel, delete, clean) and the resource (OpenCode sessions), making the tool's purpose apparent. However, it does not explain the difference between similar actions like 'cancel' and 'delete', nor does it distinguish this tool from its siblings (opencode.configure, opencode.run, opencode.run_task). A higher score would require explicit differentiation.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. The only usage hint is that active/child sessions are protected from deletion, but this is a constraint, not a usage guideline. A score of 2 reflects the lack of actionable context for choosing this tool.

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