Session status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds concrete behavioral details about the return payload (pid, WebSocket URL), which is valuable beyond the annotation. It does not contradict the read-only nature.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and outputs. No wasted words or redundancy with schema/annotations. Efficient and scannable.

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 read-only status retrieval with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential return fields and parameter logic. It lacks explicit error-handling notes, but given simplicity and annotation coverage, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes sessionId as 'Session id from debug_launch/debug_attach. Required when more than one session is live.' The description adds a practical tip ('Omit sessionId if only one session is live') that complements the schema, providing extra context for parameter usage.

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 returns a single session's status with specific fields (idle/connecting/paused/running/closed, pid, inspector WebSocket URL). It distinguishes its role from debug_list_sessions by focusing on details of one session, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative. The verb and resource are specific.

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 a conditional usage instruction ('Omit sessionId if only one session is live') which is helpful for parameter handling, but it does not explain when to choose this tool over sibling tools like debug_list_sessions or debug_get_stack. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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