termix_terminal_history_get_session_persistence_settingsRetrieve session persistence settings to verify if persistence is enabled and get the session timeout value.
Get session persistence settings. Returns the session timeout and persistence enabled flag.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description mainly needs to add outcome context. It adds the return fields, which is helpful because no output schema is provided. No contradiction with 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?
Two short sentences with no filler. The action, resource, and return value are all conveyed immediately and every sentence earns its place.
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 parameterless read-only getter, the description plus annotations fully cover what an agent needs: the operation, the safety profile, and the returned fields. Nothing critical is missing.
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 and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.
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 ('Get') with a specific resource ('session persistence settings') and states exactly what is returned: the session timeout and persistence enabled flag. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling update tool.
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 read-only, parameterless nature makes the intended use obvious, especially alongside the sibling update_session_persistence_settings tool. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative or state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.