List Sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: the polling cadence recommendation and the SessionManager's background scanning behavior, which an agent would not infer from annotations. It does not disclose latency or result freshness guarantees.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and the operational note is well placed, but the eight-line enumeration of return fields largely duplicates what the output schema already provides, adding length without added value.

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 tool with an output schema and full annotations, the description covers the remaining agent-relevant unknowns (polling cadence, background scanning, empty-list recovery). Nothing critical is missing, though freshness/latency of the session list is unaddressed.

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 tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. The enumerated fields describe output, not inputs, so there is no parameter semantics to clarify, and none is missing.

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 ('List all active Maya sessions') with explicit scope ('active'), which cleanly separates it from add_session and the scene_* siblings. An agent can identify the tool's job without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete usage context (poll every 10-30 seconds to detect new/removed sessions) and a fallback path (call maya_setup_guide() when the list is empty). It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or named alternatives such as add_session, so it falls short of a 5.

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