Inspect a recording session by ID to check its live status and confirm whether the output file exists on disk, helping you verify capture progress and results.
Inspect a single recording session by id, including live status and whether its output file exists on disk.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sessionId | Yes | Session id returned by start_recording. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.32.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Inspect' implies a read-only operation and the description usefully discloses that live status and output-file existence are included, but it does not address error behavior for invalid ids, permissions, or other operational traits.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It identifies the action, the resource, and the notable returned information without wasting words.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it identifies the lookup key, the scope, and key returned attributes. Minor gaps remain around error cases and whether the read has any side effects, but nothing essential to calling the tool is missing.
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 100%; the only parameter is documented as 'Session id returned by start_recording.' The description does not add format or validation detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 ('Inspect') and resource ('a single recording session by id'), and adds the retrieved fields (live status, output file existence). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'list_sessions', but the singular/by-id framing makes the distinction inferable.
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 phrase 'single recording session by id' implies this is the lookup tool for one known session, while 'list_sessions' would be the alternative, but no explicit when-to-use or exclusion guidance is given. Usage is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.