create_agent_session

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: writes a new session on every call (non-idempotent) and produces an unrecoverable handle. This goes beyond the annotations, which only indicate idempotentHint false, by explaining the practical consequence (a new session each time) and the risk of losing the handle. It does not cover all side effects, but adds meaningful 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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and includes critical behavioral nuance (non-idempotent, unrecoverable handle). Every clause earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 presence of an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description provides sufficient context for the tool's core function and side effects. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning the relationship to sibling tools or typical usage flow, but it is not incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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?

All six parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema already documents each field. The tool description itself does not add extra semantic value about parameters, such as relationships or usage tips. This matches the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 states the tool creates a durable attribution session and an unrecoverable handle, which is a specific action on a clear resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like end_agent_session or open_project, though the name and action make the purpose largely 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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as mentioning it as a prerequisite for other agent actions or that end_agent_session is the counterpart. The only implied usage is that creating a session is needed for attribution, but no direct context or exclusions are given.

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