ciso_assistant_api_chat_sessions_object_retrieveRetrieve a chat session by ID from CISO Assistant to inspect its details and support streaming message workflows.
ViewSet for chat sessions with streaming message endpoint.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.3.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral context — no mention of auth scope, whether the returned session includes messages/attachments, or that 'retrieve' means fetch a single session by id. The streaming remark is misleading rather than informative.
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?
One short sentence, but that brevity is under-specification, not efficiency. It is not front-loaded with the operation ('retrieve a chat session by id'), and half the sentence is about an endpoint this tool does not expose.
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?
No output schema exists, yet the description does not say what a retrieved chat session contains — messages, questionnaire runs, owner, timestamps — which is the primary reason an agent would call it. For a retrieve tool with an undocumented id parameter and no return description, it is essentially unusable without guessing.
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 single required parameter 'id' has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must explain it — instead it says nothing about what the id identifies or its format (UUID? slug?). With only one parameter the burden is small, but the description still adds zero meaning.
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 text is Django REST Framework boilerplate ('ViewSet for chat sessions') that restates the resource and never states what this operation does. It cannot be distinguished from the ~10 sibling chat_sessions tools (list, create, destroy, retrieve, update, message_create, upload_create) without reading the tool name.
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?
No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative is given. Worse, the only usage-flavored phrase ('with streaming message endpoint') points the agent toward a capability that belongs to a different sibling, ciso_assistant_api_chat_sessions_message_create, so the guidance is actively misleading.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.