delete_session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior: 'Safely terminates all agents in the session and cleans up resources' explains the destructive nature and cleanup process, while the force parameter guidance addresses handling of unresponsive sessions. It doesn't mention error conditions, permissions, or rate limits, but provides solid core behavioral context.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: the first states the purpose, the second explains the safe behavior, the third provides parameter guidance. Each sentence earns its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the core action followed by important details.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate but incomplete context. It covers the main behavior and parameter usage but lacks information about return values, error conditions, permissions required, or what happens if the session doesn't exist. Given the complexity of session/agent management, more completeness would be helpful.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It does this well by explaining the purpose of the force parameter ('to forcefully terminate unresponsive sessions') and implying session_id identifies the target session. While it doesn't detail session_id format or constraints, it provides meaningful semantic context beyond the bare schema.

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 specific action ('Delete a session and all its agents') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_agent (which deletes individual agents) and list_sessions/get_session_status (which are read-only). The verb+resource combination is precise and unambiguous.

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 clear context for when to use the force parameter ('to forcefully terminate unresponsive sessions'), which implicitly suggests when to use the default (force=False) for normal termination. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like delete_agent or provide prerequisites for session deletion.

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