get_session_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds essentially nothing beyond that: 'detailed information' does not say what the payload contains (tempo, tracks, scale, transport state) or how large it might be, so it contributes no behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the parameter note is short and clearly separated. The 'Parameters:' block is slightly heavy formatting for a single optional field, but nothing is padded or 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the single optional parameter is covered. What is missing for a tool of this role is scope: the description never distinguishes the 'session info' it returns from get_session_snapshot or get_track_tree, leaving ambiguity in a dense sibling set.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter, and it does: it explains that user_prompt is the original prompt that triggered the call and that it exists for telemetry. This tells the agent the value is not used to control retrieval, which is meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema title and default.

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 ('Get detailed information about the current Ableton session'), so the agent knows it is a read of session state rather than of a specific track, clip, or device. It does not differentiate itself from closely related siblings such as get_session_snapshot, get_track_tree, get_mixer, or session_diff, so the agent cannot tell which of these to prefer.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives. In a sibling set containing get_session_snapshot, session_diff, get_track_tree, and als_summary, an agent has no textual basis for choosing this tool over those.

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