skillgild_start_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the cost model (one run from free allowance or paid entitlement), the no-charge re-entry behavior while a session is open, and the contents of the response (instructions, permitted server tools, expiry, tool call limit). It stops short of saying what happens on expiry or what error states exist.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every clause contributes concrete information (cost, idempotency, return contents). The second sentence is dense but not padded.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating what comes back. Together with the cost and idempotency notes, this is nearly enough to call the tool correctly; only lifecycle edge cases after expiry are left unstated.

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 coverage is 100%, so skill_id's format ('public SkillGild skill ID or slug') is already documented in the schema. The description adds no further detail about the parameter, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 ('Start a session for a SkillGild hybrid_tools skill') and describes what the call yields (instructions plus server tools). It implicitly separates itself from skillgild_call_tool and skillgild_end_session by framing this as the session-opening step, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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 qualifier 'hybrid_tools skill' hints at when this entry point applies, and the idempotency note ('calling this again returns it at no cost') tells the agent it is safe to re-call. However, there is no explicit routing versus skillgild_run_skill or skillgild_call_tool, and no statement of prerequisites.

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