session_status

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds meaningful behavioral details: it explains the two possible authentication paths (OAuth login-on-connect vs. session storage) and states that token values are not exposed. This goes beyond what annotations provide and gives the agent a clear picture of the tool's 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The first sentence states the essential output; the second explains the authentication source logic. Every word earns its place, with no redundant 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 tool's simplicity (0 parameters, read-only annotation, output schema present), the description fully covers purpose, behavior, and edge conditions (token exposure, OAuth vs. session). It is a complete explanation for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics, and it doesn't; it focuses on behavior and return context, which is appropriate.

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 it reports current authentication status (login status, token_user_id, selected account), which is specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like get_user_info or list_ad_accounts. It also explicitly notes that token values are not exposed, adding clarity about what the tool does not return.

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 behavioral context on when it checks OAuth token context vs. session storage, which helps the agent understand its operation in different authentication modes. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is sufficient for basic usage guidance.

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