list_sage_sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and non-open-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that it lists workspaces for 'this client', which is the key behavioral scoping context. It doesn't mention ordering, pagination, or return shape, but an output schema exists so return values are documented elsewhere.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the action and scope. No filler 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could mention ordering or that results are scoped to the current session/client, but those are optional.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no parameters are needed, aligning with the empty input schema.

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 ('List the named Sage workspaces') and scopes it to 'belonging to this client'. Clearly distinct from all siblings, which are computation, plotting, and session lifecycle tools.

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 scope constraint ('belonging to this client') implies when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it. 'List' implies a read-only enumeration, which is the usual case.

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