Unregister Session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say whether unregistering is idempotent, whether it terminates the session or frees the ID, whether pending sync points are dropped, or whether other sessions are notified — all critical for a state-mutating lifecycle call.

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 tight sentence with the action and the trigger condition front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing in it is redundant.

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?

The output schema means return values need not be explained, and the single required param is fully documented. However, for a mutation tool with no annotations, the description leaves the consequences of unregistering entirely unspecified, which is the main gap an agent would need filled.

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, sessionId, is documented in the schema as 'Session ID to unregister'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format or sourcing detail (e.g. where to obtain the session ID), so it neither helps nor hurts.

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+resource pair ('unregister this session') and names the target system ('the orchestrator'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly reference its counterpart register_session, so differentiation relies on the agent inferring from the sibling list rather than the text.

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?

'when done working' gives a concrete lifecycle trigger for invoking the tool, which is more than most sibling tools likely offer. It stops short of stating exclusions (e.g. whether it is safe to call twice, or what happens if the session is still in a sync point), so it is clear context without guardrails.

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