list_brainstorm_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states the output includes title, turn count, and status, and implies recency ordering, but does not specify read-only behavior, sorting criteria, or whether all sessions are included. The presence of an output schema reduces the need for format details, but behavioral traits beyond the schema are under-disclosed.

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: two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second explains the parameter. Every word contributes value.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the parameter and basic output fields. However, it could enhance completeness by mentioning the ordering (e.g., 'by last modified date') or noting that it excludes archived sessions.

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 single parameter 'limit' has no schema description (0% coverage), but the description adds meaningful semantics: 'Maximum sessions to return (default 20).' This fully compensates for the schema gap and clarifies the parameter's purpose and default value.

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 tool lists recent brainstorm sessions and enumerates the fields returned (title, turn count, status). The verb 'list' combined with the resource 'recent brainstorm sessions' is specific and distinct from sibling tools like get_brainstorm_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?

The description implies usage for listing recent sessions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_recent_sessions, get_brainstorm_session). With many sibling tools, the lack of exclusions or context leaves ambiguity.

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