list_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes a read-only operation ('List') and indicates the output fields, but it does not disclose potential behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, authentication requirements, or whether any side effects exist. For a simple listing tool, the lack of mutation is implied, but more transparency would be better.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('List every generated session') and includes useful specifics about the output fields. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 simple (no parameters) and has an output schema that presumably defines the return structure, so the description need not explain return values. It sufficiently conveys that it lists all sessions with specified fields. However, it does not mention sorting, pagination, or how this relates to sibling tools like get_session_report, which could add completeness.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema covers everything trivially. The description correctly omits parameter details since there are none. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add anything further.

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 ('List') and a clear resource ('every generated session'), and even specifies the fields shown ('scene hash, status, quality'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_categories (different resource) or get_session_report (likely a single session report).

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 phrase 'List every generated session' implies the tool is used when you need a broad overview of all sessions, distinguishing it from more specific tools like get_session_report. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is inferred rather than explicitly guided.

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