femm_session_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the return shape (port, pid, physics, document, solved flag, call/error counts), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about whether the operation is read-only, what happens when no sessions are open, or whether it can fail.

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 telegraphic sentence that front-loads the resource and then lists the payload fields; nothing is wasted. It is slightly clipped to the point of being cryptic, but there is no filler.

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 no output schema, the description does the important work of naming the returned fields. Only the empty/error case and the read-only nature are left unstated, which are minor gaps at this complexity level.

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, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter surface that the description needs to compensate for.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('All open sessions') and enumerates the fields returned, so an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not differentiate itself from nearby siblings like femm_status, femm_health_check, or femm_problem_info, which could plausibly also report session state.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no condition under which this tool is preferred over femm_status or femm_problem_info, and no stated exclusions. The agent must infer that it is for enumerating open sessions rather than checking the health of a single one.

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