mem_session_list

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behaviors. It only says 'list recent' with no mention of ordering, default limit, pagination, non-destructiveness, or error states. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate tool behavior.

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, front-loading the action and resource. It is concise, though it omits essential details about parameters and behavior.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, parameter meanings, or behavioral traits like 'recent' definition, making it insufficient for reliable tool usage.

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 0%, yet the description provides zero explanation of the four parameters (project_key, limit, query, sub_scope_hint). An agent has no guidance on how to use them 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('persisted sessions/chats for one project'), and provides a clear purpose: 'so agents can select a scoped continuity lane.' This distinguishes it from siblings like mem_search or mem_get by narrowing to session/chat listing.

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 implies use when an agent needs to pick a session for continuity, but does not specify when not to use, prerequisites, or contrast with alternatives such as mem_search or mem_context_pack.

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