update_session_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool updates a file, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, how conflicts are handled, if changes are reversible, or what happens to existing content. The 'append' behavior is only hinted at in the parameter description, not in the main description.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It could be slightly more structured by explicitly mentioning the append behavior, but it avoids unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'update' entails (e.g., append vs. replace), what the session-summary.md file is, or what the tool returns. The context of 'current session info' is vague without elaboration.

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%, with the single parameter 'summary' well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 action ('update') and resource ('session summary file') with specific context ('without doing a full session close'). It distinguishes from 'end_session' by specifying partial vs. full closure, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'sync_context_files'.

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 context ('without doing a full session close'), suggesting this is for incremental updates during an active session rather than final closure. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to choose this over 'sync_context_files' or what triggers its use.

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