session.list_checkpoints

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly states 'read-only', which is a key behavioral trait and implies no side effects. However, it doesn't disclose additional behaviors such as performance implications or what happens when listing all objects.

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 extremely concise (one short phrase) and front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place; no wasted text.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic operation and parameter but lacks details about the return format, what a checkpoint is, or any other contextual information that would help an agent fully understand the tool's behavior.

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?

There is only one parameter with a descriptive title in the schema. The description adds minimal extra value by repeating 'for an object, or all objects'. With 0% schema description coverage, it adequately explains the parameter's purpose but doesn't add beyond the schema's title.

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 identifies the verb 'List', the resource 'checkpoints', and the scope ('for an object, or all objects'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like session.checkpoint (create) and session.revert (revert). The read-only note further clarifies intent.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it's clear that it lists checkpoints, there is no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' advice, nor any mention of alternatives like session.checkpoint or session.revert.

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