start_sage_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does note that the workspace has its own independent variables, but it omits important side effects such as what happens if the name already exists, whether workspace creation can fail, or whether it overwrites or errors. For a stateful creation tool, this is a significant gap.

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, direct sentence that starts with the action verb and includes only relevant information. It is appropriately front-loaded and contains no wasted words.

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 tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return-value documentation isn't necessary. However, given the large sibling set of session-management and mathematical tools, the description would be more complete if it explicitly contrasted starting a session with resetting/stopping and noted behavior on duplicate names. It is adequate but minimally sufficient.

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 single 'name' parameter is already fully described in the input schema ('Workspace name, e.g. 'curves' or 'scratch''). The description adds minimal extra meaning by tying the name to the concept of a named workspace, but it does not provide additional validation, formatting, or lifecycle details. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% 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 uses a specific verb ('Start') and resource ('named Sage workspace') and adds 'with its own independent variables', clearly distinguishing this creation tool from lifecycle siblings like reset, interrupt, cancel, list, and stop. It fully communicates what the tool does.

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 use when an isolated named workspace is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus reset/list/stop or any other session-management sibling. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving usage context to be inferred.

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