session_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results include owning connection, purpose, and creation time, which is useful behavioral context, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or empty result handling.

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?

One tight sentence that front-loads the action and resource before listing the returned fields. No filler, though it stops short of routing guidance.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description correctly focuses on scope and fields. However, the ambiguous optional 'connection' parameter and the undifferentiated sibling session_info leave an agent with real gaps when choosing the tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single optional 'connection' parameter, so the schema contributes nothing. The description's mention of '所属连接' (owning connection) implies connection is a filter/attribute axis, adding marginal meaning, but it never states that passing the parameter restricts results to one connection.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (列出 tmux 托管会话) and scopes it to alloc resource sessions, so an agent knows this is a listing tool, not a mutation. It does not differentiate from the sibling session_info, which likely returns detail for one session.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus session_info, connection_list, or resources, and no mention of prerequisites or filtering behavior. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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