Diagnose Webhound Session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing a non-destructive, safe profile. The description adds behavioral context about budgeting and waiting, which helps agents understand the intended workflow 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 description is concise with two sentences. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's diagnostic nature and the existence of an output schema (not detailed but present), the description covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what actions to avoid. It is complete for its intended role.

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?

The only parameter is session_id, which is self-explanatory from its name. However, schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no explanatory text. The description does not add any parameter-specific details, but the single parameter's meaning is obvious given the tool's purpose.

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 tool's purpose: 'Explain whether a session is healthy, done, usable, and what to do next.' This is a specific verb ('Explain') and resource (session status), and it distinguishes from siblings like webhound_health and webhound_wait by also providing next-action guidance.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: it explains when to use the tool (to diagnose session state) and what the correct next action is ('keep waiting; budget use is the point'). It also warns against stopping or forcing finalization, preventing common misuse.

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