Delete session

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and closed-world scope. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing that both running and finished sessions can be deleted, the semantic effect ('no longer counts'), and the default target when no id is supplied.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and effect, then the parameter default. 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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers target selection, allowed session states, and effect, while annotations cover safety. It leaves unstated whether the deletion is recoverable and what happens to a session's associated steps/notes, which is a modest gap for a destructive operation.

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 0% and the single parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description must carry the load. It does so well for the optionality: omitting session_id deletes this connection's running session, which is the critical semantic. It does not say what form a valid session_id takes, but the default-behavior disclosure is the more important missing piece and it is covered.

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 ('Delete a session') and adds scope: 'running or finished, so it no longer counts,' which clarifies the effect versus merely stopping a session. It does not explicitly name the sibling it competes with (stop_session), so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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 explains the fallback behavior when session_id is omitted, which is a form of usage guidance, but it never states when to prefer delete_session over stop_session or edit_session. Usage is implied rather than directed, with no exclusions or alternatives named.

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