weflow_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 states the tool 'lists' sessions, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose details like pagination, default behavior for the limit parameter, or whether the search is case-insensitive. There is no mention of side effects, error conditions, or return format specifics, which is a notable gap given the absence of annotations.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy. This is a model of efficient structure.

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 3 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not specify what 'sessions' contains, how 'limit' behaves, the difference between 'json' and 'chatlab' formats, or return value structure. It also fails to connect to sibling tools (e.g., when to use get_session_messages_chatlab). The description provides the minimum viable purpose but lacks the completeness needed for an agent to fully understand the tool's role and invocation 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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It only explains 'keyword' ('search username or display name'), which is one of three. 'limit' and 'format' are not mentioned at all, leaving their semantics unclear. This is insufficient for a 3-parameter tool with no schema documentation.

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 states the tool's function: 'List WeFlow chat sessions' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions a keyword search capability, distinguishing it from sibling tools like weflow_get_messages or weflow_list_contacts. However, it lacks a more explicit scope or exclusion, so it's not quite a 5.

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 provides minimal guidance on when to use this tool. 'Use keyword to search username or display name' gives a hint about parameter usage, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, nor any exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools like weflow_list_contacts or weflow_get_session_messages_chatlab.

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