dsh_list_sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose real behavior: result ordering, the composition of each result, and the strong completeness claim that non-listed sessions are archived or gone. It omits pagination/total-count behavior around the limit parameter and any auth or cost notes, so it stops short of full transparency.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, and the core purpose plus return shape is front-loaded before the routing and caveat sentences. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 zero-required-param list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what is returned, in what order, what the list enables, and what its absence means. The only gap is the lack of pagination guidance for the limit parameter, which leaves minor ambiguity when more than 20 sessions exist.

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%, so all four parameters are already documented (cwd, limit, query, include_subagents). The description only lightly reinforces semantics by tying "workspace folder (cwd)" to the returned field, adding no new syntax or filtering nuance beyond the schema.

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 (list saved DeepSeek Harness sessions) plus ordering (newest first) and the fields returned (title, cwd, active-run flag). It is distinguishable from dsh_list_runs, dsh_list_workspaces and dsh_session_activity by resource, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives a clear positive trigger ("Use it to find the session_id to continue") and a useful negative boundary ("Sessions not in dsh_list_sessions are archived or gone: do not look for them on disk"). It does not, however, name the alternative tools an agent should reach for when the intent is workspace or run listing rather than session listing.

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